IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


/. 


«0 


1.0 


I.I 


1.25 


■^  Ih    |I<I|2  2 


li 


12.0 


1.8 


U    11.6 


^ 


7i 


<^ 


/A 


'^A. 


c-l 


^^ 


> 


'^     > 


^^ 


/A 


'^.^y  ^ 


''W 


Hiotographic 

Sciences 
Corporation 


23  WEST  MAIN  STREET 

WEBSTER,  NY.  14580 

(716)  873-4503 


^^ 


mp 


u.. 


X? 


CIHM/ICMH 

Microfiche 

Series. 


CIHM/ICMH 
Collection  de 
microfiches. 


Canadian  Institute  for  Historical  Microreproductionii  /  Institut  Canadian  de  microreproductions  historiquas 


<r> 


Technical  and  Bibliographic  Notas/Notes  tachniques  at  bibliographiqua* 


Tha  Instituta  has  attamptad  to  obtain  tha  bast 
original  copy  availabia  for  filming.  Faaturas  of  this 
copy  which  may  be  bibiiographically  unique, 
which  may  alter  any  of  the  images  in  the 
reproduction,  or  which  may  significantly  change 
the  usual  method  of  filming,  are  checked  below. 


D 


Coloured  covers/ 
Couverture  de  couieur 


I      I    Covers  damaged/ 


Couverture  endommagie 

Covers  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Couverture  restaur^  et/ou  pellicul4e 

Cover  title  missing/ 

Le  titre  da  couverture  manque 

Coloured  maps/ 

Cartes  giographiques  en  couieur 


0 

D 
D 

n 


n 


n 


Coloured  ink  (i.e.  other  than  blue  or  black)/ 
Encre  de  couieur  (i.e.  autre  que  bleue  ou  noire) 

Coloured  plates  and/or  illustrations/ 
Pfanchas  et/ou  ilFustrntions  en  couieur 

Bound  with  other  material/ 
Reli4  avec  d'autres  documents 

Tight  binding  may  cause  shadows  or  distortion 
along  interior  margin/ 

La  tB  Mure  serr^e  peut  causer  de  I'ombre  uu  de  la 
distorsion  l«  long  da  la  marge  intArieure 

Blank  leaves  9dded  during  restoration  may 
appear  within  the  text.  Whenever  possible,  these 
have  been  omitted  from  filming/ 
11  se  peut  que  certaines  pages  blanches  ajout«es 
lofs  dune  restauration  apparaissent  dans  le  texte. 
mais,  lorsque  cela  «tait  possible,  ces  pages  n'ont 
pas  ita  filmtos. 

Additional  comments:/ 
Commentaires  supplimentaires; 


L'Institut  a  microfilm*  la  meilleur  exemplaire 
qu'il  lui  e  iti  possible  de  se  procurer    Las  details 
de  cet  exemplaite  qui  sont  peut-*tro  uniques  du 
point  de  vue  bibliographique.  qui  peuvent  modifier 
une  image  reproduite.  ou  qui  peuvent  exiger  une 
modification  dans  la  m«thode  normale  de  filmage 
sont  indiquAs  ci-dessoi's. 


r~~|   Coloured  pages/ 


Pages  de  couieur 

Payee  damaged/ 
Pages  endommagies 

Pages  restored  and/oi 

Pages  restaurdes  et/ou  pellicul4es 


I      [    Payee  damaged/ 

I      I    Pages  restored  and/or  laminated/ 


y 


Pages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxed/ 
Pages  ddcolor^es,  tacheties  ou  piqu^es 


□Pages  detached/ 
Pages  d*tach*es 

I      I    Showthrough/ 
b^    Transparence 

□    Quality  of  print  varies/ 
Qualit*  in^gala  de  I'impression 

□    Includes  supplementary  material/ 
Comorend  du  material  •■■nni^no.. 


Comprend  du  materiel  supplimentaire 

Only  edition  available/ 
Seule  Edition  disponible 


□    Pages  wholly  or  partially  obscured  by  errata 
slips,  tissues,  etc.,  have  been  refilmed  to 
ensure  the  best  possible  image/ 
Les  peges  totalement  ou  partiellement 
obscurcies  par  un  feuillet  d'errata.  une  pelure. 
etc.,  ont  *t6  fiimies  A  nouveau  de  facon  d 
obtenir  la  meilleure  image  possible. 


This  item  is  filmed  at  the  reduction  ratio  checked  below/ 
Ce  document  est  film*  au  taux  de  r*duction  indiqu*  ci-dessous. 
10X  14X  18X  22X 


12X 


16X 


20X 


26X 


30X 


71 


24X 


28X 


32X 


The  copy  filmed  here  has  been  reproduced  thanks 
to  the  generosity  of: 

National  Library  of  Canada 


L'exemplaire  film6  fut  reproduit  grAce  A  la 
g6n6rosit6  de: 

Bibliothdque  nationale  Cu  Canada 


The  images  appealing  here  are  the  best  quality 
possible  considering  the  condition  and  legibility 
of  the  original  copy  and  in  keeping  with  the 
filming  contract  specifications. 


Original  copies  in  printed  paper  covers  are  filmed 
beginning  with  the  front  cover  and  ending  on 
the  last  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, or  the  back  cover  when  appropriate.  All 
ether  original  copies  are  filmsd  beginning  on  the 
first  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, and  ending  on  the  last  page  with  a  printed 
or  illustrated  impression. 


The  last  recorded  frame  on  each  microfiche 
shad  contain  the  symbol  —►(meaning  "CON- 
TINUED"), or  the  symbol  V  (meaning  "END"), 
whichever  applies. 

Maps,  plates,  charts,  etc.,  may  be  filmed  at 
different  reduction  ratios.  Those  too  large  to  be 
entirely  included  in  one  exposure  are  fiirred 
beginning  in  the  upper  left  hand  corner,  left  to 
(right  and  top  to  bottom,  as  many  frames  as 
required.  The  following  diagrams  illustrate  the 
method: 


Les  Images  suivantes  ont  6t6  reproduites  avec  le 
plus  grand  soin,  compte  tenu  de  ia  condition  at 
de  la  nettet6  de  l'exemplaire  film6,  at  en 
conformitd  avec  les  conditions  du  contrat  de 
fiimage. 

Les  exemplalres  originaux  dont  la  couverture  en 
papier  est  imprim6e  sont  film6s  en  commenpant 
par  le  premier  plat  at  en  terminant  soit  par  la 
dernidre  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impression  ou  d'illustration,  soit  par  le  second 
plat,  salon  le  cas.  Tous  les  autres  exemplaires 
originaux  sont  film6s  en  commenpant  par  la 
premidre  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impression  ou  d'illustration  at  en  terminant  par 
la  derrviire  page  qui  comporte  une  telle 
empreinte. 

Un  des  symboles  suivants  apparaitra  sur  la 
derniire  image  de  cheque  microfiche,  selon  le 
cas:  le  symbole  ■">►  signif ie  "A  SUIVRE",  le 
symbols  V  signifie  "FIN". 

Les  cartes,  planches,  tableaux,  etc.,  peuveiit  Atre 
film6s  d  des  taux  de  reduction  diffdrents. 
Loisque  le  document  est  trop  grand  pour  dtre 
reproduit  en  un  seul  clich6,  il  est  filmd  d  partir 
de  I'angle  supdrieur  gauche,  de  gauche  d  droite, 
et  de  haut  en  bas,  en  prenant  le  nombre 
d  images  n6cessaire.  Les  diagrammes  suivants 
illustrent  la  m^thode. 


1  2  3 


1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

T 


1 


■  tJjp      National  Library       Bibliotheque  nationale 
m  T      of  Canada  d„  Canaoa 


»ALIII. 


OBSERVATIONS 


ON 


JUDGE  JONES'  LOYALIST  HISTORY 


OF  THE 


AMERICA:;  REVOLUTION. 


HOW   FAR   IS   IT  AN    AUTHORITY? 


"  FacU  speak  louder  than  words."  —^  (»w**4'^i 


JuuGK  Jones. 


BY 


HENRY   P.   JOHNSTON. 


New  York : 
D.   APPLETON    &    CO. 


ibcio 


T 


3Tl 


INTRODUCTORY  NOTE. 


The  recently  publishorl  History  of  the  American  Revolution,  by  the 
contemporary  loyalist  Judge  Thomas  Jones,  of  New  York,'  contains  state- 
ments which  seem  to  call  for  criticism  and  refutation. 

The  propri  ty  of  noticing  them  may  possibly  be  recognized  in  the  fact 
that  the  work  not  only  assumes  to  be  an  authority  and  has  already  been 
quoted  as  such,  but  some  of  the  errors  themselves  have  been  repeated  and 
are  likely  to  be  perpetuated  by  American  historical  writers. 

The  following  pages  are  devoted  mainly  to  a  comparison  of  these  state- 
ments with  the  correct  record  and  such  inferences  as  the  comparison  appears 
to  authorize.  Incidentally  the  question  is  considered  whether  the  number 
and  nature  of  the  errors  are  not  sufficient  to  afiect  the  trustworthiness  of 
the  Judge's  vvork.  as  an  original  source  of  information.  In  anv  view  it  is 
due  to  our  Revolutionary  history  to  examine  unfriendly  accounts  with 
some  care,  especially  where,  as  in  the  present  case,  they  reverse  accepted 
versions  of  events  and  transactions  or  make  discreditable  disclosures. 
New  York  Citv,  June  i,  1880. 


I 


I 


i-sl 


i 


I 


CONTENTS. 


■ 

I. 

■ 

II. 

'■ 

1 

III. 

IV. 

s 

1 

V. 

VI. 

VII. 

i 

H '  • 

VIII.- 

IX.- 

X.- 

XI.- 

XII.- 

XIII.- 

1 

XIV- 
XV.- 

■        1 

XVI.- 

• 

XVII.- 

4| 

B 

XVIII.- 

L     • 

9 

XIX.- 

t      1  T  ■    ,  PAG* 

— JudKe  Jones  Standing  as  a  Witness 

— The  Jud^je'^i-R^view  of  his  own  "Case" „ 

—The  Case  of  Colonel  Meii^'s 

— The  Case  of  Colonel  Lamb g 

—General  Washington— His  Parole-Treatment  of  Tories 30 

—  Franklin's  Treatment  of  His  Son,  the  Loyalist  Governor ,  33 

-Connecticut  in  December,  1776 

—The  Pennsylvania  Proprietary  Estate ,\ 

—Scenes  at  the  Evacuation  of  Charleston  anci  Savannah,  17S2 47 

—The  New  York  Act  of  Attainder 

5  5 

—Governor  Tryon  and  the  Connecticut  Raid,  177^ 57 

—Sir  Henry  Clinton  after  the  Storming  of  Stony  Point 60 

—  Knyphausen's  Move  upon  Washington,  1780  f,, 

—Clinton,  Arbuthnot,  and  Rochambeau,  1780 5. 

—Admiral  Parker,  Clinton  and  Fort  Moultrie,  1 776 67 

—Fortifications  of  New  York,  1776-1783 -^ 

-The  Case  of  General  Woodhuil 

—The  Case  of  Captain  Asgill 

-Concluding  Points  and  Observations 3, 


OHSERVATIOxNS 


ON 


JUDGE  JONES'  LOYALIST  HISTORY. 


I.-JUDGE  JONES'  STAN'DIXG  AS  A  WITNESS. 

TllERK  are  certain  features  of  this  History— noticeable  and 
more  or  less  important  features— which  ou^Mit  properly  to  be 
had  in  mind  in  the  course  of  examinin<r  the  particular  state- 
ments proposed. 

The  Judirc's  work,  it  will  be  observed.  e\en  upon  the  most 
superficial  readinj^,  proves  to  be  a  sweepiu"-  ••-rai'-'ment  of  the 
Revolution.  The  title  of  "  History"  a. 
<:jarded,  indeed,  as  a  misnomer,  if  in  its  ?.  • 
that  the  Judi^^e  presents  a  canditl  .md  tc 
events  of  that  period.  Upon  the  minds 
certainly,  a  contrary  impression  is  produced, 
and  confirms  the  imprcs.sion  that  purely  histonL...  illustration 
or  reflection  is  not  so  much  the  author's  object,  as  to  treat  of 
the  movement  for  the  purpose  of  condemnin^^  it— that  it  is  much 
less  a  literary  effort  than  an  cx-partc  case,  a  complaint,  or  a 
grand  indictment  of  the  train  of  events  which  resulted  in  Ameri- 
can independence. 

Perhaps  a  history  of  a  different  character  could  not  have 
been  expected  from  the  Jud^L,^e  o'  from  any  one  circumstanced 
as  he  was.  In  viev.-  of  his  political  connections,  his  sympathies 
and  temperament,  it  is  not  surprising  that  he  should  have 
vi^rorously  resisted  the  claims  of  the  Colonists. 

Jud<re  Jones,  as  we  .gather  from  his  own  representations,  was 
one   of   the   more  prominent   loyalists    or  tories    of   the    time. 


t  miyht  be  re- 
understand 
"  int  of  the 
s  readers, 
k  conveys 


8 


OUSKRVATIONS   ON 


Living  affluently  at  Great  Nock.  Lonj;  Island,  possessed  also  of 
a  large  estate  in  New  York,  and  related  by  marriage  and  social 
ties  to  few  who  were  not  as  firm  loyalists  as  himself,  he  may  be 
regarded  as  the  type  of  the  American  subject  whose  influence 
Khig  George  imagined  would  be  strong  enough  to  keep  at  least 
the  province  of  New  York    from   drifting    into    revolt.     1' rom 
1769  to  1773  h€  had  been  Recorder  of  the  city,  when  he  was 
appointed  to  succeed  his  father  as  one  of  the  justices  of  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  Co'iony.  a  position  in  the  gift  of  the  royal 
governor.      Viis  associations,  his  office,  his  conservative   mold, 
combined  to  determine  his  relations  to  the  Revolution.     There 
was   nothing  in   its  spirit  or  aim  that  he  could  approve.     He 
looked  upon   it  as  at  best    •  groundless,  radical,  and,  desperate 
movement  to  be  t.eated  with   contempt,  denounced  or  avoided. 
In   his  work  he   is  unreserved   in  the  avowal  of  his  sentiments, 
and  repeatedly  declares  his  fidelity  to  the  Crown  and  the  Church 
of  England,  while  he  also  shows  himself   a  thoroughly   good 
hater  of  agitation  and  republicanism.     Mow  far  he  publicly  gave 
vent  to  his  feelings  and  views  does  not  appear,  but  at  heart  he 
was  clearly  neither  neutral   nor  moderate,  but  uncompromising, 
and,  judging  from  some  of  his  own  expressions,  even  virulent ; 
and  when  subsequently  he  i)repared  a  so-called  history  of  the 
struggle,  it  was  inevitably  tinctured  with  the  convictions,  prej- 
udices, and  antipathies  formed  during  its  progress.     The  Judge 
necessarily  wrote  from  a  strictly  partisan  stand-point. 

Judge  Jones,  furthermore,  wrote  under  the  pressure  of  bitter 
personal  recollections.  His  own  experienc-js  during  the  war 
harmonizing  little  with  his  previous  mode  of  life  tended  to  ex- 
asperate his  apparently  sensitive,  if  not  irritable,  nature.  Being 
charged,  in  the  summer  of  1776,  when  hostilities  ui)ened  on 
Long  Island,  with  disaffection  to  the  American  cause,  he  was 
arrested  and  renvn'ed  to  Connecticut,  where  he  remained  until 
released  on  parole  in  December  following.  Sei/.ed  again  as  a 
prisoner  in  1779,  he  was  held  se\eral  months  longer,  and  finally 
exchanged  in  the  spring  of  1780.  Nor  were  matters  on  liis  own 
side  satisfactory.  British  C(  :  imissaries  and  generals  failed  to 
treat  him  with  due  respect.  He  was  pleased  with  few  of  the 
many  civil  and  military  ajipointments  made  either  by  the  min- 
istry at  home  or  commanding  officers  in    New  York.     Move- 


H 


JUDGE  JONES*    HISTORY. 

ments  in  the  field  should  have  been  the  reverse  of  or  different 
from  what  they  wjrc.  the  Jud^fe's  criticisms,  however,  being 
made  after  their  failure  :  and  the  leaders,  both  civil  and  military, 
who  A-ere  entrusted  with  the  responsibility  of  crushin^^  the  re- 
bellion deserved  only  a  merciless  handling  ♦'or  th.eir  non-success. 
The  close  of  the  war  found  his  judicial  position  snatched  from 
him,  his  property  confiscated,  and  himself  a  refugee  in  England 
—conditions  not  favorable  for  a  perfectly  impartial  treatment 
of  events  which  affected  him  so  disastrously. 

A  third  noticeable  feature  of  the  work  is  the  absence,  with  a 
few  exceptions,  of  any  authority,  on  the  part  of  the  Judge,  for 
his  many  unlooked-for  and  remarkable  statements.  The  reader 
is  informed  in  the  preface  to  the  History  that  it  gives  "  the  ac- 
count, observations,  nd  comments  of  an  eye-witness  of  acute 
intelligence,  who  was  in  a  jjosition,  oiificial  and  social,  to  know 
perfectly  the  events  he  was  describing,  and  the  parties  :,  I  jer- 
sons  who  took  part  therein  on  all  sides."  This  res-jnsible 
author;;hip  should  entitle  it,  prima  facie,  to  every  consideration. 
Hut  it  is  pertinent  to  inquire  how  far  it  was  possible  for  the 
Judge  to  be  an  eye-witness  of  what  he  describes.  So  far  as 
current  military  events  were  conc<.  -ned,  he  could  have  known 
personally  very  little  about  them.  It  can  be  shown  that  im- 
portant movements  occurred  in  and  ardund  New  York,  the 
details  and  objects  of  which  he  assumed  to  be  acquaint<;d  with, 
but  w  ith  which  it  appears  he  was  not.  There  is  no  line  drawn 
between  facts  coming  and  those  not  coming  within  his  own  ob- 
servation. In  addition,  the  Judge  remained  under  the  obliga- 
tions of  a  strict  military  parole  during  nearly  the  entire,  if  not 
the  entire,  time  from  1776  until  he  sailed  for  England  in  178 1. 
He  had  given  his  promise  to  Governor  Trumbull,  of  Connecti- 
cut, to  hold  !io  "  inimical  correspondence  with  the  enemy"  after 
his  return  to  his  home,  but  "to  conduct  peaceably  and  quietly 
with  respect  to  the  present  contest  and  troubles."  As  the 
Judge  claims  to  have  faithfully  observed  his  parole,  living  at 
his  residence,  he  was  obviously  debarred  from  witnessing  any- 
thing important  in  the  shape  of  "  events."  Clearly,  too,  he  had 
very  little  if  any  intercourse  with  the  British  headquarters  at 
New  York  where  it  might  have  been  possible  for  him  to  obtain 
a  cemiin  amount  of  authentic  intelligence.     His  severe  and  re- 


lO 


OBSERVATIONS   ON 


peated  strictures  upon  Generals  Howe,  Clinton,  Robertson,  and 
other  officers  are  not  indicative  oi"  any  familiarity  in  that  di- 
rection. It  can  hardly  be  questioned,  on  the  contrary,  especially 
as  the  Judge  does  not  make  the  claim  himself  of  b~ing  an  "  eye- 
witness," that  his  knowledge  of  jxissing  military  transactions 
was  derived  almost  exclusively  from  third  parties,  from  hearsay 
or  common  rumor,  from  such  meagre  accounts  as  appeared  in 
the  newspapers  of  the  time,  from  official  letters  which  were  oc- 
casionally published,  and  possibly  from  the  few  narratives  of  the 
war  that  had  been  printed  before  his  death  in  1793.  These 
sources  of  information  do  not  entitle  him  to  any  special  or  su- 
perior consideration  as  an  authority.  What  he  obtained  from 
printed  matter  is  not  new,  and  what  he  learned  from  others  is 
only  valuable  as  second-hand  material  which  may  or  may  not 
have  been  true. 

As  to  matters  not  military,  on  the  other  hand,  but  more  of  a 
political  or  personal  nature,  the  Judge  ought  presumably  to 
have  had  a  considerable  knowledge.  But  even  here  the  value 
of  his  statements,  and  more  especially  of  his  opinions  and  infer- 
ences, is  to  be  tested  b)-  those  common  rules  which  the  Judge 
was  doubtless  in  the  habit  of  applying  himself  in  determining 
the  credibility  of  a  witness.  Was  he  interested  or  prejudiced, 
and  if  so,  to  what  extent  ?  and  what  his  relations  to  the  men  and 
event:  he  criticises  or  condemns?  Undoubtedly  the  Judge  was 
in  a  position  to  see  and  hear  much,  before  the  outbreak  of  the 
war  at  least ;  but  in  what  light,  through  whai  medium,  in  what 
disposition  of  mind,  did  he  see  and  hear  and  write?  The  Judge 
seems  to  answer  for  himself — he  was  on  the  other  side,  a  dis- 
appointed tory,  a  monarchist,  a  hater  of  revolutions,  the  Ameri- 
can revolution  in  particular  and  of  all  who  contributed  to  its 
success.  In  this  light  l;e  evidently  cannot  be  regarded  as  an 
unbiased  witness.  How  far  he  was  a  valuable  one  may  possibly 
be  shown. 

In  referring  to  these  features  of  Judge  Jones'  work  no  re- 
flection is  cast  upon  his  own  political  status.  We  must  allow 
him  the  right  to  choose  the  side  he  preferred.  He  vvas  a  tory, 
a  loyalist,  and  a  loyalist  by  nature  anu  inclination,  as  many 
others  were  both  in  the  city  and  province  of  New  York.  In 
his  history,  which  h  ;  wrote  in  Engl;md  soon  after  the  war,  he 
not    only   attacks   the    American    cauSc,  but    the    unsuccessful 


JUDGE  JONES'  HISTORY. 


ir 


British  leaders  as  well :   certain  tories  also  are  held  up  to   the 
general  scorn.     What  he  presents  is  much  of  it  novel  and  unex- 
pected—the narrative   being  at  intervals  a  combination  of  as- 
sumed fact  and  argument— and  his  work  will  hereafter  doubtless 
be  consulted  with  a  curious  interest.     But  to  consult   it  as  a 
guide   is  another  matter.     In  view   of  the   characteristics  just 
noticed  no  candid  reader  could  be  willing  to  accept  the  Judge 
unreservedly  as  an  "  authority,"  especially  where  he  treats  of 
his  enemies,  the  revolutionary  or  whig  party.     The  conviction 
ren-iains  that  what    he  says  of  a  damaging  nature   respecting 
them  needs  confirmation.     Can  a  writer,  it  may  be  asked,  com- 
mand implicit  confidence  who  is  known  to  have  been  a  thor- 
ough partisan,  who  appears  to  have  undertaken  his  work  for  the 
purpose  of  putting  certain  men  and  transactions  in  an  odious 
light  before  posterity,  who  indulges  in  extraordinary  statements 
without  hinting  at  the  proof  on  which  they  stand,  and   whose 
personal  experiences  embittered  him  against  those  of  whom  he 
writes?     The  Judge  is  put  forward  as  a  contemporary  and  eye- 
witness,  but  the  effect   of  this  claim  is  seriously  impaired  when 
he  is  also  found  approaching  his  subject,  as  he  does,  in  an  in- 
tciisc/y  hostile  attitude. 

If.  from  this,  it  sufificicntiy  appears  that  upon  general  princi- 
ples Judge  Jones'  standing  as  a  witness  and  an  authority  is 
impeachable,  there  is  good  ground  at  the  outset  for  going 'fur- 
ther and  looking  into  some  of  the  details  of  his  testimony. 


II. -THE   JUDGE'S    REVIEW   OF    HIS   OWN   CASE. 

One  of  the  first  and  most  striking  pt^nts  inviting  notice  is. 
the  free  and  deliberate  manner  in  which  the  Judge  deals  with 
persons  and  personal  characters.  Whatever  may  be  said  in 
general  of  his  criticisms  and  alleged  exposures,  in  certain  in- 
stance-, Hiey  are  so  obviously  libellous  that  it  is  much  to  be 
doubted  whether  he  would  have  ventured  to  put  them  into 
print  in  his  own  time  without  being  assured  that  the  parties 
attacked  could  not  reach  him  at  law.  We  have  an  illustration 
of  this  in  his  references  to  Washington,  Franklin,  Schuyler, 
Colonels  Meigs  and   Lamb,  and   uthers  whosj   reputations  he 


I 


1    E 


12 


OBSERVATIONS   ON 


!  f 


I  t 


seeks  to  bring  under  a  cloud.  Before  taking  up  these  names, 
however,  we  may  stop  to  inquire  whether  Judge  Jones  places 
himself  before  history  with  quite  the  accuracy  and  candor  ex- 
pected of  a  writer  with  a  judicial  training.  If  he  does  not,  we 
are  all  the  more  prepared  to  discover  that  he  fails  in  the  same 
respect  in  his  treatment  of  others. 

The  Judge  makes  much  of  his  own  personal  grievances. 
The  "Case  qf  Thomas  Jones,  Esq.'"  and  its  consideration  both 
from  a  public  and  private  point  of  view,  take  up  several  pages 
of  the  work,  The  author,  as  already  stated,  was  seized  or  ar- 
rested at  three  different  times  during  the  course  of  the  war— once 
by  the  civil  and  twice  by  the  military  authorities.  Respecting 
the  first  arrest  he  appears  to  make  no  complaint,  while  the 
other  two  he  characterizes  as  dishonorable  acts,  reflecting  in  the 
one  case  on  Washington  and  in  the  other  on  Governor  Trum- 
bull, of  Connecticut.  But  a  brief  review,  even  of  his  own  facts, 
may  possibly  compel  a  modification  of  this  judgment. 

In  the  eyes  of  the  Revolutionary  leaders  in  New  York,  the 
Judge  was  an  unqualified  tory  living  on  Long  Island,  and  hence 
a  person  not  to  be  left  at  large  to  encourage  toryism  around 
him.  On  the  19th  of  June.  1776,  a  Committee  of  the  Provincial 
Congress  sent  him  notice  to  appear  in  Xev/  York  on  the  25th 
of  the  same  month  and  satisfy  them  whether  he  should  be  con- 
sidered as  "  a  friend  to  the  American  cause  and  of  the  number 
of  those  who  are  ready  to  risque  their  lives  and  fortunes  in  de- 
fence of  the  rights  and  liberties  of  America."  The  Judge 
doubtless  having  little  inclination  to  recognize  rebel  authority 
or  avow  before  it  his  politic;-!  sympathies,  failed  to  put  in  an 
appearance,  and  accordingly,  two  days  later,  on  the  27th,  was 
arrested  at  his  home  and  taken  to  New  York  upon  the  charge 
of  refusing  to  obev  the  Committee's  summons.  He  was  not 
examined  at  this  time,  but  on  the  30th  received  a  discharge 
I'rom  Gouverneur  Morris,  the  onl\-  member  then  in  town,  upon 
giving  the  following  parole  : 

•'  1  certify  that  Thomas  Jones,  Ks().,  this  day  appeared  hefor^  me  a  prisoner, 
taken  up  Ijy  order  of  Conj^ress,  and  havinij  promisc(i  u|)on  his  word  ami  honor 
to  appear  at  such  lime  and  place  as  a  Committee  of  the  Congress  of  this  Colony 
shall,  upon  reasonable  imlice  to  him  ^\\<ix\  or  left  at  his  usual  phice  of  abode, 
direct.  The  said  Thomas  Jones  is  therefore  permitted  to  «o  unto,  and  reside  at,  his 
usual  place  of  aboile,  until  the  further  order  01  the  said  ConK'russ  or  Committee. 


\ew   York,  ] 


line  Jolh, 


■n(,. 


Gntv.   M'lt^Kis 


JUDGE  JONES'    HISTORY. 


13 


Under  this  pcirole  Judge  Jones  remained  at  his  residence  un- 
disturbed until  the  i  ith  of  August  following.  On  that  date  he 
was  arrested  by  order  of  General  Washington  and  conducted 
to  New  York  as  one  of  the  tories  who  could  not  safely  be  per- 
mitted to  remain  in  the  vicinity  of  the  enemy.  On  the  12th  he 
was  brought  before  a  Board  of  ofificers  consisting  of  Lord  Stirling, 
General  Scott,  General  MacDougall,  and  Colonel  Reed,  and  in- 
formed that  he  was  "  a  prisoner  to  the  American  army"  to  be 
removed  with  others  to  the  State  of  Connecticut,  and  "there  to 
be  disposed  of  in  such  manner  as  Governor  Trumbull  should 
think  proper." 

It  is  this  second  or  military  arrest  that  the  Judge  refers  t(i  as 
one  of  his  particular  grievances.  He  represents  that  when 
brought  before  the  Board  of  ofificers  they  did  not  pretend  that 
he  was  guilty  of  breaking  the  parole  given  to  Gouverneur 
Morris,  but  justified  his  arrest  on  the  ground  of  "prudence, 
necessity,  and  the  custom  of  nations ;"  and  out  of  this  the  Judge 
manufactures  his  charge.  Speaking  of  himself  in  the  third 
person  he  says  (Vol.  II.  p.  276):  "  Mr.  Jones  lived  upon  Long 
Island,  was  a  man  of  property,  had  great  influence,  and  General 
Howe  was  expected  to  land  upon  the  island  every  da>-,  under 
which  pretence  this  flagrant  breach  of  a  solcinn  and  sacnd  parole 
given  by  the  civil poiver  x.<as  justified  by  the  fcbel  chief:'  In  other 
words,  the  Judge  evidently  desires  to  be  understood  that  Wash- 
ington authorized  hisarrest  irrespective  of  the  Judge's  obligations 
to  the  Lrovincial  Congress— that  the  military  deliberately  nulli- 
fied an  engagement  made  between  him  and  the  civil  authorities. 

Viewed  in  atn-  light  this  can  hardly  be  regarded  as  other 
than  a  weak,  if  not  a  frivolous,  charge  for  the  Judge  to  prefer. 
It  would  possibly  be  a  sufficient  answer  to  sa\-  that  war  is  war 
and  the  military  supreme,  that  in  extreme  exigencies  extreme 
meas  es  are  justified,  and  that  if  Washington  deemed  the 
Judge's  arrest  necjssary  from  a  military  point  of  view  his  arrest 
should  have  been  made  regardless  of  his  relations  to  any  civil 
power.  But  what  was  this  "solemn  and  sacred  parole"  which 
he  gave  to  the  Provincial  Congress?  Nothing  more  than  a 
promise  to  answer  its  call  whenever  he  should  be  summoned 
before  it.  It  will  be  observed  that  it  guarantees  him  no  protec- 
tion, nor  does  it   prescribe  his  political   conduct  or  restrain  the 


W'l 


(■     * 


14 


OBSERVATIONS   ON 


exertion  of  his  influence  against  the  American  cause  as  a  condi- 
tion of  protection,  nor  does  or  could  it  promise  him  immunity 
from  arrest  by  the  miHtary  power.  The  parole  was  practically 
a  notice  to  be  ready  "  to  appear ;"  it  did  not  in  the  slightest 
degree  limit  or  affect  the  future  course  or  conduct  of  the  Ameri- 
can authorities,  civil  or  m.ilitary.  They  were  each  left  free  to 
treat  the  Judge  and  all  other  tories  as  the  exigencies  of  the 
Campaign  might  require.  The  Judge  was  liable  to  be  summoned 
by  the  Committee  at  any  moment ;  he  was  equally  liable  to 
arrest  by  the  military.  Under  these  circumstances  if  the  Con- 
gress finally  turned  the  case  over  to  the  military  authorities, 
can  there  be  any  question  as  to  its  right  to  do  so?  If  both  the 
civil  and  military  powers  were  in  perfect  harmony  in  regard  to 
the  manner  and  propriety  of  the  seizure,  what  could  the  Judge 
have  to  say  in  the  matter?  Could  not  the  Congress  waive  all 
claim  upon  him  if  it  so  desired?  Would  it  not  have  been 
obliged  to  waive  its  claim  if  the  military  saw  fit  to  take  up  the 
case?  and  did  not  the  Judge  know,  or  ought  he  not  to  have 
known,  that  the  civil  power  in  that  crisis  was  secondary,  and 
that  all  considerations  would  have  to  yield  to  military  "  pru- 
dence" and  "  necessity"  ? 

But  referring  to  the  facts  again  we  find  that  the  Judge  and 
his  fellow-tories  were  in  reality  treated  with  unusual  considera- 
tion. They  were  arrested  by  Washington's  order- -the  General 
beintr  under  no  obligations  whatever  not  to  arrest  them.  When 
Washington  was  informed,  however,  that  they  did  claim  to  be 
under  a  parole  to  answer  the  summons  of  the  Congress  (and  he 
now  seems  to  have  heard  of  it  for  the  first  time),  he  proposed 
at  once  to  relieve  them  of  an\-  fe.ir  they  might  have  that  the 
Congress  would  call  for  them  w  hen  it  would  be  out  of  their 
power  to  appear;  and  he  immediately  communicated  the  facts 
and  his  wishes  to  that  body  in  a  letter,  dated  August  12.  as  fol- 
lows: "Some  of  these  gentlemen  have  expressed  iloubts  and 
raised  difficulties,  from  engagements  they  lay  uiuler  to  your 
Honourable  Body,  or  some  Committees.  They  do  not  appear  to 
me  to  deserve  much  attention,  as  they  cannot  with  any  pro- 
priety, be  charged  w  ith  a  breach  of  any  part  under  their  present 
circumstances  ;  but  I  beg  leave  to  submit  to  your  consideration 
the   propriety  of  removing  the  pretence."      The  Congress    in 


JUDGE   JONES'    HISTORY. 


15 


making  their  reply,  thanked  the  CiWimandcr-in-Chicf  for  ordering 
the  arrests,  and  to  settle  all  doubts  in  the  matter  of  their  paroles, 
passed  the  following  resolution  : 

"  Whereas  certain  members  of  the  Convention,  by  authority 
from  the  same,  did  take  the  parol  of  sundry  persons,  inhabitants 
of  this  State:  And  whereas  His  Excellency  Genl.  Washington 
hath  since  found  it  necessary  to  cause  some  of  the  said  persons 
to  be  made  prisoners :  Therefore, 

"  Resolved  unaninnmsiy,  That  the  said  several  parols  be,  and 
they  hereby  are,  declared  totally  void,  as  to  any  obligations 
thereby  laid  upon  those  who  have  been,  since  the  giving  of  the 
said  parol,  made  prisoners  as  aforesaid."  ' 

That  Judge  Jones  and  his  fellow-prisoners  well  knew  of  this 
action  appears  from  the  Judge's  own  "Case,"  in  which  he  states 
that  he  was  informed  that  the  parole  was  dissolved  and  that 
"an  entry  of  its  dissolution  was  made  in  the  Journals  of  the 
Provincial  Convention."  When,  therefore,  the  prisoners  started 
for  Connecticut  and  before  their  Actual  detention  commenced 
they  were  bound  by  no  paroles  whatever,  either  civil  or  military. 
Were  anything  further  needed  not  only  to  justify  but  also  to 
commend  the  course  of  the  Commander-in-Chief  in'  this  matter 
it  may  be  found  in  the  general  militarv  situation  alreadv  inciden- 
tally referred  to.  With  the  British  at  Staten  Island  threatening 
to  move  upon  him  at  any  hour,  Washington  properly  assumed 
the  exercise  of  every  power  required  to  thwart  his  antagonist 
and  secure  his  own  success.  Among  the  measures  regarded  as 
imperative  was  the  arrest  of  the  principal  tories  and  their  re- 
moval from  the  scene  of  operations.  It  was  a  case  of  •'  military 
necessity,"  and  on  that  ground  fully  justified.  Washington's 
best  vindication,  in  short,  is  his  own  letter  on  the  subject 
addressed  to  the  President  of  the  Provincial  Congress,  the 
material  part  of  which  is  as  follows : 


"Head  Qi-artkrs,  Aug.  12,  1770. 
As  the  time  is  certainly  ne.ir  at  hand  and  may  be  hourlv  expected,  which  is 
to  decide  the  fate  of  this  City,  and  the  issue  of  this  campaiKn,  I  thought  it  highly 
improper  that  persons  of  suspected  character  should  remain  in  places  where  their 
opportunities  of  <loing  mischief  were  much  greater  than  in  the  enemy's  camp      I 


'  Journals  Prov.  Congress,  Vol.  I.  p.  570. 


i6 


OBSERVATIONS   ON 


therefore,  have  caused  a  number  of  tliem  to  be  apprehended  and  removed  to  some 

distance,  there  to  remain  until  this  crisis  is  passed I  postponed 

this  most  disagreeable  duty,  till  the  last  moment;  but  the  claims  of  the  army  upon 
me,  an  application  of  a  number  of  well-affected  inhabitants,  concurring  with  my 
own  opinion,  obliged  me  to  enter  upon  it  while  time  and  circumstances  would 
admit.  I  have  ordered  a  very  strict  attention  to  be  paid  to  the  necessities  of  the 
gentlemen  apprehended,  and  to  their  comfortable  accommodation  in  every 
respect,  both  here  and  at  the  place  of  their  destination."  ' 


!i  1 


The  proper  representation  of  the  case  appears,  then,  to  be 
this — that  \Vashin<^ton  was  convinced,  hostihties  being  immi- 
nent, that  Judge  Jones,  as  a  dangerous  tory,  ought  not  to 
remain  in  the  vicinity  of  New  York  ;  that  he  was  justified  in 
removing  the  Judge  on  the  ground  of  military  prudence  and 
necessity;  that  any  relations  existing  between  the  Judge  and 
the  civil  authorities  could  not  affect  his  duty  as  commander-in- 
chief  of  the  army,  even  if  he  knew  of  the  existence  of  such 
relations,  which  was  evidently  not  the  case  ;  that  upon  his  arrest 
he  gave  the  Judge  a  hearing  before  a  Board  of  officers  ;  that 
when  the  Judge  entered  the  plea  that  he  was  under  obligations 
to  the  civil  authorities,  he  was,  by  the  civil  authorities  them- 
selves, immediately  released  from  those  obligations  ;  and  that 
when  he  was  finally  sent  off  to  Connecticut  for  confinement  it 
was  as  a  purely  military  prisoner  resting  under  no  parole  what- 
soever. 

Under  this  state  of  facts  how  is  it  possible  to  entertain  a 
charge  of  dishonorable  conduct  on  the  part  of  Washington? 
At  what  point  in  the  case,  it  may  be  asked,  does  such  conduct 
appear?  All  the  facts,  per  coiitnr.  seem  to  unite  to  dissipate 
the  charge,  and  it  may  be  characterized  as  a  lamentable  failure — 
Washington's  course  throughout  having  been  wise  and  politic, 
and  his  treatment  of  the  Judge  as  honorable  as  it  was  con- 
siderate. 


Ihe  next  point  concerns  Governor  Trumbuirs  experiences 
with  the  Judge.  Arriving  in  Connecticut,  "  Mr.  Jones"  and 
his  fellow-prisoners  were   there  detained    until   the  9th   of  De- 


'  Spai-k't  Washington,  Vol.  'V.  p.  44. 


C 

r 
c 
i: 
li 

Y- 
0 

0 

c 

1 


JUDGE  JONES'    HISTORY.  17- 

cember  following,  when  they  were  permitted  to  revisit  their 
homes  on  signing  a  parole  to  give  the  enemy  no  assistance  and 
return  when  called  for.  It  was  not  until  six  months  later  that 
the  Governor  demanded  their  return.  Not  making  their  ap- 
pearance, the  demand  was  renewed,  but  again  without  efYect. 
On  each  occasion  the  Governor  transmitted  his  letters  to  the 
British  headquarters  by  flags  of  truce,  through  the  regular 
channels.  Nothing  further  was  done  in  the  case  until  November, 
1779,  when  it  was  proposed  to  attempt  the  capture  of  the  Judge 
for  the  purpose  of  offering  him  in  exchange  for  General  G. 
Selleck  Silliman,  of  the  Connecticut  State  troops,  who  had 
lately  been  made  prisoner  by  a  party  of  tories  from  Long  Island. 
The  attempt  succeeded,  and  Judge  Jones  once  more  found  him- 
self in  the  hands  of  the  Connecticut  authorities. 

This  final  arrest  or  seizure— the  third  in  his  experience— is 
another  of  the  Judge's  personal  grievances.  He  complains  that 
he  was  surprised  at  his  residence,  forcibly  taken  therefrom 
while  still  on  his  parole,  and  unjustly  charged  with  violating  his 
word  of  honor  in  not  returning  to  Connecticut  when  called'' for 
He  declares  emphatically  (Vol.  II.  p.  292)  that  he  was  so 
charged  by  the  Legislature  of  New  York  and  the  breach  of  his 
parole  made  a  ground  for  attainting  his  person  and  property, 
and  likewise  so  charged  by  Governor  Trumbull,  to  whom  he 
was  immediately  amenable,  although,  as  the  Judge  continues 
to  charge,  both  Legislature  and  Governor  k>u-7,<  that  he  never 
received  the  notice  of  recall. 

Deferring  the  action,  taken  by  New  York  foe  consideration 
m  connection  with  the  Act  of  Attainder,  the  Judge  may  be 
answered  that,  as  for  Governor  Trumbull,  his  course,  on  the 
contrary,  appears  to  have  been  entirely  legitimate.  He  had  the 
most  substantial  grounds  for  ordering  the  capture  of  the  Jud^^e 
on  this  last  occasion,  and  there  is  no  sufficient  warrant  for  the 
msmuation  that  he  charged  the  Judge  with  a  personal  breach  of 
honor.  Two  or  three  original  letters  from  the  manuscript 
papers  of  the  Connecticut  Governor  and  of  Governor  Clinton 
of  New  York,  may  here  be  introduced  as  throwing  some  li-ht 
on  the  points  in  question.  Thus  after  Judge  Jones  had  been 
captured  and  brought  to  Fairfield,  Connecticut,  Governor 
Trumbull  wrote  to  him  as  follows : 


i8 


OUSEkVATIOXS  <.N 


I     ! 


"(Copy.)  "  Lf.hanon  i2th  November  I77() 

Sir:  it  is  now  near  two  years  since  I  wrote  to  you  and  the  other  gentlemen 
from  New  Yoric  who  were  confined  to  this  State,  requesting  their  and  your 
return  on  your  paroles — I  have  never  yet  received  any  satisfactory  reason  for  a 
non-compliance  with  that  re()uest.  You  will  now  be  able  to  inform  me  your 
reasons.  I  have'  given  Mr.  Deodate  Silliman  a  Flag  with  letter  to  Sir  Henry 
Clinton,  proposing  your  exchange  for  Gold  Seileck  Silliman,  Esqr.  A  compliance 
on  the  part  of  Sir  Harry  will  obtain  your  permit  on  the  present  occasion  to  return 
to  New  York.  Notwithstanding  this  exchange,  however,  should  it  take  place,  I 
shall  still  hold  you  answerable  to  your  former  parole  given  me  when  suffered 
hertofore  to  go  within  the  Hritish  Lines — 

I  am  Sir 
Your  most  obedient 
hble  servant, 
Thomas  Jones  Esqr,  Prisoner  at  Fairfield."  '  J— T— 1. 


In  an.swer  to  this  letter  Jud_oe  Jones  drew  up  an  affidavit  to 
the  effect  apparently  that  he  had  never  receivcil  any  notification 
from  Governor  Trumbull  requirini:^  his  return,  either  throu<^h 
the  British  Headquarters  or  any  other  channel,  and  that  at 
the  time  of  his  last  arrest  he  was  faithfully  obscrvintr  his  origi- 
nal parole,  given  in  December,  1776.  This  being  satisfactory 
to  the  Governor,  the  Judge  was  in  time  exchanged  for  General 
Silliman.  It  appears  also  that  with  this  exchange  Governor 
Trumbull  wished  to  have  nothing  more  to  do  with  the  Judge 
and  his  fellow-tories,  and  transferred  the  care  of  them  to  Gov- 
ernor George  Clinton  of  that  State.  In  doing  so  he  wrote 
the  following  letter  to  Clinton  explaining  his  action  up  to  that 
date  : 


'Sir: 


"Lebanon  loth  March  1780 


"  You  will  also  find  enclosed  five  papers  relative  to  Thos.  Jones  Esqr,  who 
was  some  time  since  taken  from  Long  Island.  Mr.  Jones  is  one  of  those  Gentle- 
men who  were  taken  up  in  the  State  of  N.  York  in  the  summer  of  1776  and 
sent  on  to  this  State  for  confinement  as  dangerous  enemies  to  the  American 
cause. — And  as  it  may  be  thought  by  those  who  are  not  acquainted  with  every 
circumstance  that  Mr.  Jones,  (as  having  with  the  other  Gentlemen  referred  to, 
broken  the  conditions  of  the  parole  on  which  he  and  they  were  by  me  permitted 
to  return  to  the  City  of  New  York.)  ought  rather  to  be  closely  and  rigorously 
confined,  than  to  be  again  liberated  on  parole  or  in  Exchange — I  have  taken 
particular  care  to  enclose  you  an  affidavit  sworn  to  by  Mr.  Jones,  as  a  previous 
step  to  the  Negotiatio-    of   Exchange  of  himself  for  Gi-nl  Silliman  of  the  militia 


'    Trumbull  Papers,  vol.  20,  p.  208.     Mass.  Hist.  Societv,  Boston. 


JUDGE  JONES'   HISTORY, 


19 


of  this  State.— And  as  this  affidavit  leads  directly  either  to  a  suspicion  of  my 
attention  in  this  affair,  or  of  the  Honour  of  the  British  Commander  in  N.  York,  I 
think  it  necessary  to  add  that  in  the  summer  of  1777,  6  mo  after  these 
gentn  had  been  permitted  to  revisit  their  friends,  a  letter  was  written  by  me 
to  all  of  them  collectively  demanding  their  return  agreeable  to  parole— which  was 
left  with  the  officer  commandg  at  the  advanced  post,  beyond  which  the  Flag  was 
not  admitted.— That  afterwards  letters  were  written  to  each  one  scparatelv  of 
similar  import  and  delivered  in  the  same  manner— No  answer  has  been  received 
to  either  of  them.— In  consequence  of  which  my  letter  (a  copv  of  which  is  en- 
clos'd)to  Sr  Henry  Clinton  was  forwarded— No  answer  has 'been  received  to 
this,  and  it  remains  for  you  to  determine  on  whom  the  imputation  of  Dishonor 
shall  rest— I  beg  leave  to  add  that  from  this  time  I  resign  to  vou  the  further  care 
of  these  gentry  to  be  dispos'd  ..f  as  yuu  shall  see  fit,-their  paroles  if  you  wish 
them  shall  be  sent  on. 

With  all  esteem  and  respect 

I  am  Dr  Sir 

Your  Most  Obedient 

&  most  Hble  .Servant, 

Signed        J.   Trl'mbull. 
GovR  Clinton  X:  York."  ' 

To  this  letter  Clinton  replied  briefly  as  follows: 

"  PouGHKEEPSiE  May  I"  1780 

Sir:  I   have  been    honored    with    your    Excellency's    Dispatch    of   the    io"» 
March  last  and  its  Enclosures  some  time  since. 


I  am  fully  persuaded.  Sir,  that  your  Conduct  towards  Mr.  Jones,  has  been 
strictly  consistent  and  proper.  If  the  repeated  notifications  which  vou  sent  into 
the  british  lines  did  not  reach  him  it  is  his  misfortune.  Mr.  Jones  must  be  sen- 
sible that  we  cannot  controul  the  enemy's  officers  within  their  lines— if  they  have 
kept  from  him  information  regularly  conveyed  and  in  which  he  was  so  much  in- 
terested it  is  to  them  he  must  apply  for  Redress.  Your  Excellencv  will  be 
pleased  t..  accept  my  thanks  for  the  trouble  you  have  taken  in  this  Business  and 
I  shall  be  obliged  in  having  the  Paroles  of  all  the  Gentry  forwarded  to  me  when 
a  convenient  opportunity  presents. 

I  have  the  honor  to  lie, 

with  great  Respect  and  Esteem, 
Your  Excellency's 

Most  Obedient  Servant 

Geo.  Ci.inton."- 


■  Clinton  Papers,  State  Library,  Albany.  First  draft  of  it  also  in  Mass 
Hist.  Society's  collections,  Letters  ami  Papers  1777-17S0,  p.  153.  The  Judge's 
affidavit  referred  to  does  not  appear  among  the  MS. 

''Clinton  and  Trumbull  Papers,  Albany  and  Boston.     The  omitted  portion  of 
the  letter  refers  to  financial  matters  mentioned  by  Trumbull. 

2 


20 


OlISEKVATIONS   ON 


w 

ii 

ii 


That  these  letters  are  of  vakie  in  this  connection  will  prob- 
ably not  be  questioned.  They  indicate,  first,  that  Governor 
Trumbull  treated  Judge  Jones,  after  his  capture,  with  all  the 
fairness  and  consideration  to  w  hich  he  was  entitled.  Certainly 
the  Governor  hints  at  no  dishonorable  coniluct  on  the  p.irt 
of  the  Judge,  as  the  latter  alleges.  His  first  step — an  obviously 
proper  and  necessary  requirement — was  to  request  an  explana- 
tion from  the  Judge  for  failing  to  appear  when  called  for.  That 
explanation  proving  valid  and  sufficient,  the  Judge  was  not 
held  personally  responsible  for  his  non-appearance. 

The  letters  furthermore,  furnish  ample  justification  of  the 
Governor's  course  in  authorizing  the  seizure  '  f  the  Judge  on 
the  occasion  in  (|uestion.  The  fact  appears  that  Trumbull  had 
three  times  demanded  of  the  British  authorities  the  return  of 
the  tory  prisoners  to  Connecticut,  and  the  demand  had  been 
ignored.  They  were  not  forthcoming.  Either  the  prisoners 
themselves  were  guilty  of  a  breach  of  faith,  or  the  authorities 
were  defying  the  Governor's  power  to  enforce  the  observance 
of  the  paroles  on  which  the  prisoners  had  been  permitted  to 
return  to  their  homes.  Under  these  circumstances  can  there 
be  any  doubt  as  to  the  line  of  action  which  Trumbull  would 
have  been  justified  in  pursuing  thereafter?  Can  there  be  any 
doubt,  for  example,  respecting  his  right  to  secure  the  return  of 
the  prisoners  by  force,  if  their  re-arrest  within  the  enemy's  lines 
could  be  effected?  Unciuestionablj- he  would  have  been  justi- 
fied in  doing  this,  both  to  maintain  his  own  authority  and  com- 
pel respect  for  the  sanctity  of  paroles  •  and  the  seizure  would 
have  been  justified  entirely  irrespective  of  the  question  whether 
Trumbull  knew  that  the  prisoners  had  or  had  not  received  the 
notification  for  their  return  to  Connecticut.  It  was  sufficient 
that  they  had  been  called  for  and  had  not  come.  It  only  re- 
mained, then,  to  seize  them  if  possible,  (^ne  of  their  number, 
Judge  Jones,  was  seized  and  brought  back  to  Connecticut. 
Can  we  question  either  the  propriety,  legality,  or  morality  of 
the  act?  No  doubt  the  Judge  felt  greatly  abused,  but  as  Gov- 
ernor Clinton  suggests,  it  was  from  his  own,  the  British  authori- 
ties, that  he  should  have  sought  satisfaction,  and  not  from  the 
American,  who  rightfully  held  him  as  their  prisoner.  It  must 
thus  appear,  also,  that  when  Judge  Jones  was  seized,  no  neces- 


A^ 


JUDGE  jo.\r:s'  msTORv. 


21 


sary  implication  attached 

ally  },Miilty  of  a  breach  of 

statement  of  the  case  or  in  the  forc-oin.L,r  letters  upon  which  it 

can  be  assimied  that  Trumbull  believed  he  had  broken  his  parole. 


to  that  art  that  he  had   been  pcnon. 
faith.     There   is   nothing  in  his  own 


() 


be 


intrary,  .-.  u  ue  irue,  as  me  Judge  represent.-,,  uuil  luc 
Governor  knew  that  he  had  never  received  the  notification  to  re- 
turn, it  is  only  proper  to  infer  that  the  Governor  could  not  have 
regarded  him  as  personally  chargeable  with  a  br .ach  of  faith. 
That  Trumbull  would  have  declared  the  Judge  responsible  when 
he  knew  that  he  was  not,  is  scarcely  to  be  admitted. 

The  Judge's  two  charges  against  the  Connecticut  Governor 
are  msufficiently  supported.  All  the  facts  and  circumstances 
tend  t..  show  that  he  war,  justified  in  seizing  the  Judge,  and  it 
nowhere  appears  that  he  charged  him  vith  a  breach  of  his  parole 
as  a  grountl  of  his  seizure. 

If  Judge  Jones  found  himself  by  his  last  arrest  in  a  trying  and 
aggravating  position,  it  was  his  own  misfortune.     If  he  volun- 
tarily mliicred  to  a  side  that  esteemed  him  so  lightly  as  not  to  ' 
notify  him  of  his  recall  or  protect  him  against  recapture,  he  couid 
make  no  complaint  of  any  act   of   his   enemies  justified   by  the 
laws  of  war.     It  is  difficult,  in  fact  impossible,  to  discover  wherein 
he  was  treated  by  those  enemies,  the  Americans,  in  the  matter  of 
his  arrest:  and  paroles  in  any  other  than   a  fair  and  reasonable 
manner.     Hi.;   charge  of  dishonorable  conduct  on  the  part  of 
Washington  does  not  survive   examination,  and    in   regard   to 
Trumbull's  course,  we  have  to  concur  with  Governor  Clinton 
that    it    was   ".strictly   consistent    and   proper."      The  Judge's 
attempt  to  make  himself  a  martyr  at   the  expense  of  these   Uvo 
honored  names  is  hardly  creditable. 


-NOTE. 


Jii.c.E  Jones  Exchange  for  General  Si.xi.MAN.-Sir  Henry  Clinton  and 
Governor  Trumbull  agreed  to  the  exchange  of  the  parties,  soon  after  the 
Judges  capture;  but  before  the  exchange  was  completed,  Clinton  sailed  on  his 


1 

t 

i 

32 


OBSERVATIONS  UN 


South  Carolina  expedition,  leaving  General  Knyphausen  in  command  at  New 
York,  Trumbull  then  wrote  to  Knyphausen  in  the  matter  ami  received  reply 
Feb.  24,  1780,  from  Commissary  Loring,  that  he  was  directed  by  General  Knyp. 
hausen  to  state  that  General  Clinton  had  left  him  no  "  instructions"  for  the  e\- 
change.  ( /Vww/';/// /'(//(/f,  Vol.  XI.  p.  71.)  Trumbull  acconlinKly  wiote  again, 
March  13,  and  enclosed  to  Knyphausen  a  copy  of  "the  proposals  made  for  the 
exchannf  of  B.  Genl.  Siliiman,  i.S:c.,  for  T.  Jones,  Esq.,  iScc,  by  Mr.  Franklin  and 
Maj'  Andre's  consent.  The  Governor  adiled:  "  I  hojie  this  measure  will  put  an 
end  to  any  further  ili'lay  or  objection  to  the  execution  of  the  proposed  exchange, 
and  have  only  to  add  that  Mr.  Jones  -hul  be  ordered  in  as  soon  as  H.  Genl 
S'.lliman  shall  be  sent  out  to  us.'  Trumbull  also  wrote  to  Governor  William 
Franklin,  President  of  the  Hoard  of  Associated  Loyalists,  requesting  him 
to  furnish  Knyphausen  with  the  ori  -nid  proposals  or  Andre  s  consent.  The 
Governor,  furthermore,  wrote  on  the  same  date  to  Judge  Jones  ,  •  .Miildle- 
town,  that  he  revoked  the  permission  which  had  been  given  him  to  go  into  New 
York  in  exchange  for  General  .Siliiman,  until  further  orders,  because,  as  he 
says,  "  those  proposals  being  fully  known  in  N.  York  give  me  some  reason  to 
suspect  a  Disposition  at  least  to  Delay  if  not  to  fully  evade  ihem."  (Tnini/'it// 
Papers,  Vol.  XX.  pp.  236-23S.)  To  Triindjull's  letter  of  the  t3th,  Knyphausen 
replied  on  the  njlh  that  he  would  "inciuire  particularly  into  the  affair"  and  an- 
;swer  "in  a  short  time."  This  answer  tloes  not  appear  on  file  among  the  Gover- 
nor's papers,  but  it  was  doubtless  favorable,  and  on  the  27th  of  .April  following 
the  exchange  was  finally  effected. 

The  incidents  (jf  the  exchange  as  given  liy  .Mrs.  General  .Sillimari  (  foiics'  llisto'v. 
Vol.  II.,  p.  565),  may  be  supplemented  by  extracts  from  letters  from  the  General 
himself,  and  his  brother  Deodatc  Siliiman.  The  latter  had  charge  of  the  Uidge 
and  sailed  with  him  from  Fairfield  in  the  schooner  Mifflin,  of  New  London,  at  9 
A.M.April  27.  "  About  three  in  the  afternoon."  he  reports  to  the  Governor, 
"  I  had  the  Pleasure  of  meeting  the  Genera!  off  hart  Island  on  his  way  to  Fair- 
field to  be  exchang'.  We  then  Proceeded  with  Flaggs  together  to  the  Grand  DL;l-e 
guard  ship  off  \ew  City  Island,  where  the  master  of  the  Fhigg  and  myself  ware 
taken  on  board,  and  the  e.vchange  was  then  cumpleated  My  my  giving  a  Receipt 
that  I  had  Rec'  the  Ge.ieral,  and  taking  Receipt  that  I  had  Delivered  Mr.  Jones  in 
Exchange  for  him — which  I  beg  leave  to  Transmilt  to  vour  Fxceilencv." 


General  Silliman's  letter,  written  to  the  Governor  (/',;/</-,f,  \'ol,  XI.  p 
is  as  ft)llou,'- ; 


1070), 


"  F.\IKMI.I.I).  May  2(1  17S0 
Sir:  Last  Fryday  evening,  I  had  the  satisfaction  again  to  return  from  ca]  livitv  to 
my  Family  and    Friends,  and  once  more  to  breathe  the  .Mr  nt    I  iJarty  and    I'ree- 
dom. 

I  left  Xew  York  on  Wensday  last  on  Parole,  in  order  to  coi.,c  Home  to  pro- 
cure your  Lxcellency's  Permission  for  Mr.  Jones  to  be  sent  in  in  F.\c^ange  for 
me.  On  Thursday  about  Three  of  the  Clock  in  the  afternoon,  1  ha|)i)ily  met  Mr. 
Jones  in  the  .Sound  near  Hart  Island,  going  in  under  your  Excellency's  Flag  in 
order  that  1  might  come  out  exchanged.  We  immediately  put  back,  and  ca.Tie 
under  the  Ster"  jf  the  Guard  Ship  the  (7;-.?;/,/ /J«Xv,  comm-  idcd  by  Caj)!.  Holman, 


I 


JUDGE  JONES'   HISTORY. 


23 


which  Iny  between  New  City  Island  and  Hart  Island.  The  F.xchanRe  was  there 
madf,  and  we  hininK  exchanged  vessels,  Mr.  Jones  proceeded  immediately  for 
New  York,  having  the  wind  and  tide  for  him,  but  I  wai,  detained  bv  the  same 
means  that  carried  him  on  till  the  next  morning,  and  then  made  sail  and  got 
Home  at  oveninK. 

And  now  Hon'.  Sir  give  me  Leave  to  return  your  Excellency  my  most  sin- 
cere  I'hanks  for  the  many  F-wours  that  I  have  m  Time  past  experienced  from 
your  Kxcellcnry,  and  Especially  foi  your  late  particular  attention  to  every  meas- 
ure that  tended  to  return  me  to  the  Blessings  of  |,il-erty  and  Freedom. 

The  Deputy  Commissary  of  I'risoncrs  when  I  parted  with  him  threatened  that 
they  would  soon  have  me  again.   .   .  . 

I  am  Your  E.xcellency's 
Most  Obedient 

Humble  Servant 

O.  Sei.leck  SII.LIMAN. 
His  E.\cellency  Gov'.  Tkumiiili.." 


1070), 


HI.— THE  CASE  OF  COLONEL  MEIGS. 

Passino  from  judge  Jones' "  Case,"  that  of  Colonel  Meigs 
may  next  be  taken  up  as  an  illu.stration  of  the  author's  method 
in  his  treatment  of  others.  So  far  as  his  estimates  of  character 
appear  to  be  mere  impressions  formed  by  the  Judge  in  a  dis- 
turbed and  prejudiced  state  of  mind,  they  will  be  accepted  for 
what  they  are  worth ;  but  where  he  enters  into  facts  as  the  basis 
of  his  opinion,  a  proper  regard  for  the  reputation  of  men  who  in 
their  day  rendered  good  service,  requires  a  verification  of  the 
facts  themselves.  In  the  case  of  Meigs  we  have  a  remarkable 
piece  of  judicial  or  historical  portraiture,  whichever  it  may  be. 

Colonel  Return  Jonathan  .Meigs,  of  the  Connecticut  line, 
stands  among  the  famous  officers  of  his  rank  in  the  Revolution- 
ary army.  His  name  is  identified  with  Arnold's  expedition 
against  Quebec,  a  brilliant  exploit  at  Sag  Harbor,  Long  Island, 
the  storming  of  Stony  Point,  and  the  various  movements  along 
the  Hudson  until  1781.     He  closed  an  honorable  life  in  1823  as 


24 


OBSERVATIONS   ON 


the  government's  agent  among  the  Cherokee  Indians,  by  whom 
he  was  affectionately  called  the  "White  Path"  in  appreciation 
of  his  integrity  and  friendship.  Against  this  officer,  whose  char- 
acter has  ever  been  above  reproach,  Judge  Jones  now  brings 
three  charges,  namely,  (i.)  that  he  was  a  paidoned  felon,  (2.) 
that  he  deliberately  broke  his  parole,  and  (3.)  that  he  headed  the 
"  conspiracy"  of  the  American  prisoners  at  Quebec  in  1776.  A 
fourth  charge  connected  with  the  case  is  to  the  effect  that  the 
Continental  Congress  X'«^-7i'  that  Meigs  was  a  violator  of  the  pub- 
lic faith  and  yet  approved  his  conduct  and  rewarded  his  services. 
What  the  Judge  says  of  the  Crlonel,  after  giving  an  account  of 
his  Sag  Harbor  expedition  in  the  spring  of  1777,  is  as  follows 
(vol.  I,  p.  181),  the  italics  being,  in  this  and  other  quotations, 
the  present  writer's : 


"This  MeiRs  was  a  native  of  Conneclicut,  of  a  reputable  family,  and  lar^e 
connections.     A  few  years  before  the  war,  he  had  been  detected  in  New  York  in 
passing  counterfeit  paper  money  in  imitation  of  the- lawful  paper  money  of  that 
colony,   knowing  the  same  to  be  counterfeit.     This   crime.  t)y   the  laws  of  New 
York,  was  felony  without  the  benefit  of  clergy.     For  this  he  was  apprehended, 
imprisoned,  indicted,  tried,  convicted,  sentenced  to  be  hanged,  and  a  day  fixed  for 
-he  execution.     But  upon  a  joint  application  of  the  Governor,  the  Council  and 
General  .Assembly  of  Connecticut,  to  the  Governor  of  New  York  in  behalf  of  the 
prisoner,  he  was  by  the  latter,  with  the  advice  of  his  Majesty's  Council,  pardoned 
and  discharged.     When  the  disturbances  began  in  America  he  obtained  a  commis- 
sion in  the   Connecticut  troops  and   was   with   the   army   befort    Boston    in    1775. 
When   Arnold  undertook  to  march  from  thence  by  the  way  of  the   Kennebeck 
across  the  country,  and  assist  Montgomery  in  the  siege  of  Quebec,  Meigs  turned 
out  as  a  volunteer,  and  upon   this  occasion   obtained   a  majoritv.     When  Mont- 
gomery  attempted  to  storm  the  garrison,  Meigs  was  of  the  partv.     Upon  the  fall 
of  Montgomery  and  the  defeat  of  his  party.  Meigs  was  among  a  number  of  other 
rebels  taken  prisoners.     The  prisoners  were  detainetl  in  yu<'bec  during  the  winter 
and  civilly  treated.     They  had  rations  equally  with  the  Kin>.   .troops.    Such  of  the 
privates  as  were  in  want  of  clothes  were  by  the  humanity  of  (ieneral  Carleton  sup- 
plied with  every  necessity.     The  officers  had  the  liberty  of  the  town  upon  parole. 
The  common  men  were  confined  in  comfortable  commodious  places.     The  officers 
had  the  liberty  of  visiting  the  men  whenever  they  pleased.     While  thus  enjoying 
all  the  comforts  that  prisoners  could  wish  or  desire,  they  entered  into  aconspiracy. 
(('/  'ci'hic/i  A/,'i:;-s  w<is  ,1'  the  head)  to  seize  the  garrison.     The  night  and  hour  was 
fixed  upon,  and  the  rebels  forming  the   blockade  had  notice  of  it.     They   were  to 
attack  the  town  without,  and  while  the  garrison  should,  upon  the  alarm,  repair  to 
their  several  places  of  duty,  Meigs  and  the  other  prisoners  were  to  make  an  at- 
tack within.     Of  this  conspiracy  the  Government  got  tinielv  notice.     The  officers 
were  of  course  taken  up.  and  with  the  men,  closely  confined  during  the  winter.    In 
Jul.v,  1776,  General  CaHeton  sent  the  whole  of  them  by  water  to  tlie  several  prov- 


:il 


JUDGE   JONES'    HISTORY. 


25 


mces  to  wh.ch  they  respectively  belonged,  first  taking  their  paroles  not  to  take  up 
arms  against  Great  Br.ta.n  until  exchanged.  I  '„,/,,■  M»  ^„,,/,  ,,,„  j^„- .,  ,„;,,, 
^./•.r/orm., /ns  So,  Narf.or  e.p.M,ion.     This  Congress  knew.  yet.  so' far  from 

h  ^^^",7^  "Tl  "  "'"'  "'  '""""■■'  "'  ^^'''^'  ^"'^  ^^^'^"'y-  'hey  not  onlv  voted 
h,m  the  thanks  of  the.r  body,  which  were  transmitted  in  a  letter  signed   b'v  their 

President    but   presented  him  with  a  silver-hilted  sword  of  considerable 'value 
Whether  General  Howe  ever  complainc.l  to  Congress  of  this  flagrant  violation  of 
pubhc  fa,th  I  know  not.     Hut  this  I  know,  if  he  did,  he  got  no  satisfaction.     Con- 
gress ,;//wr<v/ ///,.,„■/ and  rewarded  the  man." 

These  are  serious  accusations,  and  if  true,  let  in  a  ray  of  un- 
pleasant light  upon  .some  of  the  methods  adopted  bv  our  ances- 
tors to  secure  the  success  of  the  Revolution.     But  they  a//  fail 
when   compared  with   records  more  authoritative  than    Jud-e 
Jones'  manuscript.     Were  no  other  records  existing,  the  inhV 
rent  improbability  of  the  charges  ought  to  be  their  own   refuta- 
tion.    Can  It  be  assumed,  for  example,  that  a  despicable  charac- 
ter, such  as  Meigs  is  pictu.  2d,  should  have  been  permitted  to 
hold  an  officers'  commission  in  the  King's  Colonial  militia  service 
prior  to  the  Revolution,  that  thereafter  Trumbull  and  Washin<^- 
ton  should   have  appointed  him  a  Colonel   in  the  Continental 
army,  and  that  subsequently  the  Government  should  have  re- 
tained him  for  many  years  to  the  close  of  his  life  in  a  public  po- 
-sition  of  honor  and    trust?     The  imputations  are    unworthy  of 
credit,  and   the  documents   in  the  case  dispo.so  of  them   finally 
Thus  two  of  the  charges,  making  Colonel  Aleigs  a  parole  breaker 
and  declaring  Congress  to  have  been  cognizant  of  the  fact  are 
disproved  by  the  following  note  from  Washington's  Headquar^ 
ters,  written  by  Colonel  Webb,  of  the  Commander-in-Chief's  staff 
and  published  in  the  Comuxticut  Gazette  of  New  London    lami- 

a>y  31-  1777: 


'■'tl 


m\ 


"  Hk.M)  Oiartkrs  in  Morkistmwn,   Jan.  10,  1776  [1777] 
I  have    >t    m   command  from  his  J^xcellency   (iencral  Washington,  to  request 
you  w,  1  pubhsh  the  following   list  of  gentlemen,  officers  and  volunteers,  -Jo  arc 
>rL-auJ  Jro>,  ,Ju;,- paroles,  which  they  g.-ive  (iencral  Carlcton,  In- an  exchange  of 
others  of  the  same  rank  and  number  belonging  to  the  British  army. 

I  am  &c., 

Samuel    B.  Webb,  A.D.C. 
Maj..rs      )/,/,^,^,>-,     Bigelow;    Captains.     I.amh,    Tobham,     Thaver.     Morgan 
Goodrich     Hanchett;    Lieutenants    McDougall.   Compton,    Clark,' Webb,    Feger 
[I-ebiger],  Heth,    Savage,    Brown,    Nicholls,  Bruin,   Steel  ;  Ensign,  Tisdal     Vol- 
unteers, Oswald,  Duncan,  Lockwo.ul,  McGuire,  Pottertield,  Henrv." 


11 


#n 


26 


OBSERVATIONS   ON 


I ,  h' 


As  the  Sag  Harbor  expedition  was  not  undertaken  until 
May  23d  following,  we  find  from  Colonel  Webb's  letter  that 
Meigs  was  regularly  exchanged  four  months  and  more  before  the 
time  when  Judge  Jones  claims  that  he  was  still  under  his 
parole.'  The  Colonel's  honor  is  thus  clearly  vindicated  :  so  also 
!s  that  of  Congress,  whose  members  are  charged  with  beino- 
fully  informed  of  an  act  which  was  never  committed  The 
Judges  tirade  against  that  body,  quoted  above,  is  founded  on 
nothing  and  conies  to  nothing. 

The  second  and  more  odious  charge   representing  Colonel 
Meigs  as  a  criminal  before  the  war  must  be  characterized  as  a 
gross  hbel  upon  the  memory  of  a  worthy  man  and  brave  soldier 
the  individual   described  by  the  Judge  as  a  pardoned  counter- 
feiter being  quite  another  character,  one  Felix  Meigs  and  not 
Keturn  Jonathan,  nor  belonging  to  the  same  family.     Abundant 
proof  of  this  existing  in  manuscript  could  be  spread  out  were  it 
necessary,  or  did  the  documents  furnish  anything  of  historical 
interest.     It  is  enough  to  know  that  the  Judge  blundered  un- 
pardonably  when  he  identified   the  Colonel  as  the  culprit-un 
pardonably  because  he  failed  to  assure  himself  that  he  had  not 
blunde.x.1.     Nor  does  the  Judge  state  the  case  precisely,   al- 
though  his  opportunities  for  accuracy  were  good,  he   being  a 
judicia   officer  at  the  time  in  New  York  and  his  father  one  of 
the  judges  of  the  court  which   tried  Felix.     This   person   who 
was  engaged  ,n  the  boating  trade  around  the  cit^•,  was  brou<.ht 
up  before  the  July  term  of  the  Court  in  the  vea;  1772.     Rcf?re 
sentence  was  carried  out,  however,  a  few  of  his  friends  in  Con- 
necticut   petitioned   Governor  Trumbull    to    request   Governor 
lryon,of  New  York,  to  pardon   him  upon   the  ground  of  his 
previous  good  character  and  certain  extenuating  a'rcumstances 
n  the  case;  and  upon  this  ground  Trumbull  laid  the  matter  be- 
fore I  ryon.      fhe  Legislature  of  Connecticut  had  nothing  to  do 


'  The  (late  of  Colonel  Meigs'  exchant^e  is  of  some  cnseouenr^       if  k„ 
exchanged  until  March,  „,,  as  statecl  in  the  N  "  r  r^S;ct  L^V^r  ^ 
66  ,  he  was  then  violating  his  parole,  for  he  had  been  promoted     o  he   Lieut 

St;;  ^:'t;t ;:;  ^^^^ ";  ^"'^-^  '^''-  ^^^  ^-^-''>  -- '-  ^^ 

juuj,L  nenr\  .  but  the  Judge  makes  no  mention  of  the  evchm.r^      Th     , 
date  .s  January  xst.     See  Biographical  Sketch  of  Col.  .Me  g    in  .    .     '  y"    '^,^Z 
/r'/^/c;;j  for  April,  iSSo.  "' ■""^-  oj  .imeman 


JUDGE   JONES'    HISTORV. 


27 


witli  ,t.  Governor  Tryon.  who  at  that  time  maintained  the 
fnendhest  relations  with  his  Connecticut  neighbor,  referred  the 
case  to  h,s  council  on  the  8th  of  September  following,  and  was. 
adv.sed  by  them  to  postpone  action  until  his  "  Majesty's  Pleas- 
ure    could    be    ascertained.      This  was    communicated    in  due 

^r^!'^.^'"'^^''''"''^^"^'^''"   ''  •'^"er  dated   "Whitehall    Dec^ 
9   ,   1772     leavmg  the   final   determination    in   Tryon's    hands 
who  thereupon   signed  a   full   pardon  for   Felix   under  date  of 
April  19,  i7;3.' 

This  brief  statement  will  doubtless  be  accepted  as  sufficient 
to  Identify  the  person  whom  Judge  Jones  had  in  mind  when  he 
penned  the  libel  on  the  distinguished  Continental  Colonel.  As 
he  appears  to  have  remembered  so  many  particulars  of  the  case 
the  query  suggests  itself  \^o^^■  he  happened  to  fail  in  the  impor- 
tant particular  of  names  and  brand  the  wrong  man  with  in- 
famy.  ^ 

The  remaining  charge  or  assertion  that  Colonel  Meigs  headed 
the  Quebec  Conspiracy  has  no  force,  since  that   conspiracy  was 
nothing  more  than  a  justifiable  attempt  on  the  part  of  the  pri- 
soners to  mak-e  their  escape  ;  but  as  the  Judge  evidenth-  regards 
It   as  a  serious  offence,   it  may  be   ask-ed   whether  th'e  enemy 
would  have  so  far  favored  this  "  ringleader"  a.  to  permit  him  to 
recurn  home  on  parole  before  any  of  his  companions,  and  that 
too,  but  a  few  weeks  after  the  detection   of  his  plot  ?     Nor  was- 
the  consideration  he   received  on  leaving  Quebec  quite  such  as 
would  be  accorded  a  desperate  conspirator-Captain  Dearborn 
who  a  one   returned  with   Meigs,  giving  us   in   his    manuscript 
journal  a  brief  account  of  their  departure  as  follows  : 

"  May  16.  [1776]  .  .  .  At  5  ;  of  the  clock  the  Town  Major  came  fur  Major 
Me.Ks  .^  myself,  to  go  ,0  the  Lieut.  Governor  to  give  our  Parole-the  verbal 
agreement  we  made  was  that  if  ever  there  was  an  e.xchange  of  Prisoners,  we  were 
to  have  the  benefit  of  it  and  until  then  we  were  not  to  take  up  arms  against  the 
Kmg. -After  g.ving  our  Parole  from  under  our  hands,  we  were  carried  before 
the  Genl  who  appear'd  to  be  a  very  humane  tender-hearted  man.  After  wishin^r 
us  a  good  voyage,  &  saying  he  hoped  to  give  the  remainder  of  our  oBicers  the 
same  Liberty,  he  desir'd  the  Town  Major  to  conduct  us  on  Roard-we  desired 
leave  to  visit  our  men  in  prison  but  could  not  obtain  it-after  getting  our  baggage 
cV  taking  leave  of  our  fellow  prisoners  we  went  on  board  a  schooner,  which  we 

>  .\V7.^  York  C.lomol  Manusa-itts,  vol.  99,  p.  iii.  and   vol.  100.  p.  43.      SecrT- 
tary  of  State's  office,  Albany,  N.  Y.  •  H   ■+  • 


28 


OBSERVATIONS   ON 


There  is  but  one  comment  to  be  made  on  this  case:  Every 
niatenal  damagmg  statement  regardin^^^  Colonel  Meigs-four  in 
number.  ,t  the  last  can  be  included -is  found  to  be"  I" 
throitgJumt.  ■' 


IV.— THE    CASIi    OF   COI.OXK].    LAM  I!. 

The  next  case  is  that  of  Colonel  John  Lamb,  of  New  York 
C  ty.  comnKUKhng  the  Fourth  Continental  Artillerx-  Re^inu^  t 
u^m   Judge  Jones   couples    with    Meigs   as    anoui  C  ^ 
parole-breaker    among   Washington's     officers.      The     pa^st"' 
containm<T  the  charo-c   ;«  ...    f^n  ,  ^  "<-     passage 

L-unb  w.-rh  ",      !  ""'""•    ^'"'^   '"'"t'''''"   "-eferring    to 

Lamb  .>th  seem.ngly  der.sive  familiarity  as  •' John"  (Vol?  II. 

'  -Mobility.'     The  .l-t  hZ,^Z-lT''  '  ''"'  '"'""^'""-  ^'"""^'  '^e 

There  wa.  nothing  left  t 'ke  p         i       Wh"  7T'''  ^°'"'^  ''°P"'^^''>-  ^-'--d- 
a.ain  rose  into  consequ  nee     he    lied  1 7  '"'""^'^  commence.!  John 

abused  the  Loyalists    har.rlued    h  T     '  "'"''^'  '"^'''""'  '^"^^^  treason, 

Genera.  Lees  .Hs;::„     g  k!    'g     Le'T  ^^.Vh'!  '^""^^  '^^  '^"^"^^'     ^>- 
cannon  and  stores,  in  the  sprin.  of-- ,'  "1  "'"'^""^    '"  ^■'^^^-  ^''''^'  '^^  ^^eir 

was  made  Master-General  if  te  1  .:;  'cTnT;'""  '  ^"r"  '"  ''^''^-  J'"^" 
terwards  joined  Montgomery   in  C . n    .  "'"'^  '"  '""'-'  ^"'^  "^"ff-  ^e  af- 

to"  sent  all  the  prisoners  to  their  re^e  t  veT  "7-  "'''•     ^^^■"^^^'  ^^^^l- 

bear  arms  a.ainst  Great  Britai  ^  1  , ^tu  Txch'  '  ^'^  ^.'^  '"^•""  ""'  ^" 
^rit  could  not  hear  t.,  he  idle,  and  haJrl:^::  '1^ ,,  ^'T^^  ^""-^ 
the  attack  upon   Danburv   and   wis    »,/,„//  ,      .  '" -M^nl,  1777,  he  was  m 

Constitution  when  taken  b^  G  „!  'cl^  ':''':f '^  '"^^  ^'"•'"'' '  ''^-f-ding  Fort 
hisescape."  '    "="^^''' Clmton   ,n  October,  1777.      He  luckily  tnadc 

Lamb  Mith  Me.rs  in  th  •  1  st^.f  .  ''""''   "^"^^''"^^ 

'  ""'■""'"■'"  ''•^•-  ^""'""'  -  "-~'  -f  tbc  Hoston  PublicTn^ 


JUDGE   JONKS'    HISTORY.  29 

printed  in  Leake's  Life  of  Lamb.  One  of  these  is  a  memorial 
to  Congress,  dated  No\-ember  25,  1776,  in  whicli  we  have  this 
ofificer's  own  sense  of  the  obh^-ation  he  was  under.  An  extract 
from  It  is  as  follows: 

"  To  the  Ihmorabh  Con^'>vss  of  the  United  States  of  Ameriea. 

Genti.f.mkn  :  Altho'  the  Enemy  have,  contrurv  to  mv  expectations 
.berated  me  from  the  dreary  Horrours  of  aPrison,  and  suffered  me' to  return  to  my 
family  and  friends.  I  am  still  subject  to  their  power  an.l  controul  ;  liable  to  be 
called  upon  by  them  to  surrender  myself  a  prisoner  whenever  thev  please  ■  and 
restramed  by  the  sacred  ties  of  honour  from  drawing  my  sword  again  in  defence 
of  my  country  till  exchanged  for  some  officer  of  theirs.  Extremelv  anxious  to  be 
relieved  from  this  truly  painful  and  disagreeable  situation,  I  waited  on  General 
\\ashington  .mmediately  after  my  arrival  from  Quebec,  earnestlv  soliciting  his 
interest  with  your  Honours  for  that  purpose.  But  as  I  have  not 'vet  heard  that 
such  an  event  had  taken  place-owing,  I  imagine,  to  the  critical  situation  of  the 
two  armies  ;  I  take  the  liberty  to  address  your  Honours  on  that  subject,  humbly 
requesting  that  I  may  be  included  in  the  next  exchange  o.  Prisoners." 

Four  days  later  Congress  received  this  petition,  and  imme- 
diately resolved:  "That  the  General  be  directed  to  include 
Major  Lamb  in  the  next  exchange  of  Prisoners;"  and  that  an 
exchange  was  speedil\-  effected,  and  the  Major  released  appears 
from  the  following  notification  from  Colonel  Knox  at  Washing- 
ton's headquarters  : 

"Trknton,  Jan'y  2,  1776  [1777] 
Sir:     I  have  the   pleasure  to  acquaint  you,  that  Gen.   Howe  has  eouseuted  to 
your  exchange,  and  sent  out  the  fa  role  whieh  yen  gave  Gen.  Carleton.      His  Excel- 
lency, Gen.  Washington  wishes  to  provide  for  you  in  proportion  to  your  great 
merits,  and  wishes  to  see  you  as  soon  as  possible. 

I  am  Sir  with 

esteem,  your  most 
ob  &  hble  Servt, 

H.  Knox 
Commanding  the  Artillerv 
Major  Lamii  „f  the  United  States." 

While  these  documents  definitely  settle  the  parole  question 
in  favor  of  Colonel  Lamb  and  against  Judge  Jones,  it  may  be 
observed  as  in  the  case  of  Colonel  Meigs,  that  even  were  this 
evidence  wanting  it  cannot  be  supposed  that  Lamb  would  have 
been  permitted  to  hold  an  active  military  command,  especially 
at  so  important  a  post  as  Fort  Montgomery,  when  at  any  mo- 
ment he  could  be  demanded  by  and    returned   to  the  encnu"  as 


'J 


if 


30 


OHSERVATIONS   ON 


one  of  their  prisoners.    John  Lamb,  we  suspect,  was  too  stirrin- 
a  bon  of    Liberty  and  too   unctions  a  hater  of  tories  to  escape 
uncomphmentary  and   vindictive   mention   by  the  Judge;  but 
what   the  Judge  writes  about   liim  with    apparently  the '  best 
rehsh  turns  out  again  to  be  a  Hbel.' 


V.-THE  JUDGES    CHARGES    AGAINST  WASHINGTON. 

TONS    PAROLE. 


WASHING. 


The  third  mih'tary  personage  whom  the  "learned  "  Jud-c  at 
tempts  to  drag  into  disgrace  is   none  other  than  the  Ame'i-ican 
Commander-in-Chief:  for  we  are  given  to  understand  that  li-  not 
only  broke  h>s  parole  in  his  younger  days,  but   that  during  the 
Kevolution,  h.s  conduct  more  than  once  was  marred  with  coarse- 
ness seventy,  and  actual  cruelty.     The  charge  of  parole-breaking 
might  have  been  anticipated.     A  writer  who  could  readily  believe 
that  Washington  suffered  Colonels  Meigs  and   Lamb  to  assume 
heir  regular  duties  in  the  army  before  being  exchanged  would 
nave  little  nesitation  in  questioning  the  honor  of  the  Chief  him- 
self in  the  matter  of  observing  his  own  parole.      Hut.  inevitably 
he  Judge  again  comes  to  grief  with  his  charge,  as  appears  from 
the  editor  s  own  notes  on  this  point.    The  charge  (Vol.  IL  p.  .46) 
Ks  to  the  effect  that  when  taken  prisoner  at  Little   Meadows  in 
1754.  in  the  I^rench  and  Indian  War.  Washington   ••  pledged  his 
honour  not  to  bear  arms  against  France   for   twelve   months," 
but  tha    nevertheless  he  was  found  fighting  -  under  the  banners 
01   Hraddock.  upon  the  Monongahela"  before  the  vear  was   up 
Ihis  accu.sat.on.  however,  meets  two  obstinate  facts.     /-/,•./    All 
that  the  Trench  demanded  of  Washington  and  his  party  was  a 
promLse  ;../  ro  .cork  upon  auy  Innldtngs  or  forts  uust  of  the  ,noun. 
Unns  dunng  the  year  beginning  with  the  date  of  the  capitulation. 
Otherwise    they   were    left    free    to   serve  as    English    soldiers. 

puDiish  a  libel  on  mere  rumor?  J""s^  "-> 


JUDGE  JONES'    HISTORY. 


31 


Washington's  presence  with  Braddock.  therefore,  was  not  a  vie 
lation  of  his  parole.  Siroiui.  An  interval  of  more  than  Hvclvc 
months  elapsed  between  the  Little  Meadows  surrender  and  Brad- 
dock's  disaster;  so  that  in  any  case  there  would  have  been  no 
breaking  of  the  pledge  given  to  the  French.  The  Judge  took 
up  report  or  supposition  and  attempted  to  make  history  out  of  it. 


WASHINGTON  AND  TORY  RAIL-RIDING. 

Not  content  with  preferring  this  charge  against  Washington— 
d  charge  which,  if  proven,  would  alone  be  sufficient  to  lower  him 
in  the  estimation  of  posterity— the  Judge  proceeds  to  hold  him 
up  in  another  light.  He  lays  stress  in  particular  upon  the  con- 
duct of  the  Chief  in  the  case  of  the  British  Captain  Asgill,  which 
attracted  much  attention  towards  the  close  of  the  war.  and  also 
upon  the  satisfaction  with  which  he  is  alleged  to  have  looked 
upon  the  persecution  of  New  York  tories  on  a  certain  occasion 
in  1776.  As  to  the  latter  case,  it  appears  that  on  the  12th  of 
June  a  number  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty  and  others  ferreted  out 
several  specially  obnoxious  tories.  and  rode  them  on  rails  through 
the  city.  According  to  the  Judge  they  were  carried  from  point 
to  point  and  their  offences  duly  proclaimed.  Occasionally  the 
mob  would  stoj),  indulge  in  some  jeering  demonstration,  and 
then  move  on  (\'ol.  L  p.  Ip2). 

"  The  like  pniclanuitions,"  continues  the  Jud^e,  "were  made  before  the  Citv 
Hall,  where  the  provincial  Convention  was  then  sitting  forming  laws  for  the 
civil  government  of  the  province;  before  exchan^'e  where  the  committee  were 
sitting  making  rules  and  regulations  for  preserving  the  good  order,  the  peace  and 
(jiiiet  of  the  city;  and  before  the  door  of  (leneral  Washington,  who  pretended  the 
army  iitider  his  comm  -.nd  was  raised  for  the  defence  of  Aiiuruaii  I ihi-rtw  for  the 
preservation  of  the  /v///.f  ry'wi/wXv'//,/,  and  tor  the  protection  of  America  against 
the  unjust  usurpations  of  the  British  ministry.  Notwithstanding  which,  so  far  did 
this  huinane  General,  and  the  two  public  bodies  aforesaid,  approve  of  this  unjus- 
tifiable mob,  that  received  the  sanction  of  them  all.  They  appeared  at  the  win- 
dows, raised  their  hats,  returned  the  huzzas  and  joine<l  in  the  acclamations  of  the 
multitude.  Nay  so  far  did  General  Washington  give  his  sanction  of,  and  appro- 
bation to,  this  inhuman  barbarous  proceeiiing  that  he  gave  a  very  severe  repri- 
mand to  (ieneral  Putnam,  who  accidentally  meeting  one  of  the  processions  in  the 
street,  and  shocked  with  its  barbarity,  attempted  to  put  a  stop  to  it,  Washington 
declaring  that  to  discourage  such  proceedings  was  to  injure  the  cause  of  liberty  in 
which  they  were  then  engaged,  and  that  nobody  would  attempt  it  but  an  enemy  to 
his  country." 


■im 


m 


32 


UJiSKRVATIOXS    ()\ 


The  render  will  doubtl 
is  an   "  unmerciful  "  and 


ess 


ajrree  with  the  Juil^^e  that  rail-rid 


insj 


but  it 


cannot  be  a 


unnecessary  proceedin-r  i 


ssunied  that  manv 


story  he  tells  here  res 

is  grounded  in  truth.     Washiu'^t 
th 


n  any  case 
will  agree  with  him  that  tlu 


P'.'Cting  Washington's  approval  of  tl 


lie  mob 


gton  is  to  he  found  uniformly 


c  side  of  order  and  humanity.     His  treatment  of  torie 


on 


when  they  showed  t 


was  neither  sever 


iiemselves  "  th 


s,  even 


e  most  inveterate  enemi 


th 


IS 


e   nor  unprecetlented.     W'c   h: 


point  cxjjresscd  but  a  short  t 
above,  when  Governor  Livin^fst 


ive  his  view 


es, 
s  on 


ime  after  the  oc 


currence  noted 


priety  of  permitt 


\n< 


lomes. 


W 


on  sought  his  advice  on  tlu 
certain  disaffected  persons  to  return  to 


to  th 


isiungton  replied  that  such  perm 


;  p  ro- 
th 


eir 


I 


ose  whom  the  Governor  knew   ami   could 


ission  could  be  given 


wouki   su' 


,^est  to  you,  that 


trust,  but   aild.- 


abused,  and    I   have  had  r 


my  temlerness   has   b 


een    ofte 


n 


th 


em  ;  fi^'oitldshowtlu 


eason  to  repent  the  iiululgence  sh 


sistciit  iciih  our 


III  all  possible  liiniuiiiit 


own 


in.'it  safety;    but   matt 


vanced  to  sacrifice  anvthiu"-  t 


r  and  kindness,  eon- 
ers  are  now  too  far  ail- 


uage  of  a  General  who  delighted  in  rail-rid 


o  punctilios."     This  is  not  the  1 


m- 


But  £ 


iiig  processions. 


as  a  matter  of   fact  the   military  did  disperse  the  mob 


and  the  evidence  is  strong  that 
of  Washington    himself.     E; 
refers  to  the  affair  as  follows 


It  was  done  by  express  command 


sign    Caleb   Clan,    a 


p.    an    eye-witness. 


It  seem  to  be  ciuirch-  legitimate  to  infer  that  the  ■■  Geiieril  " 

ivU.  ef.  The  E„s,«„  elsewhere  cfers  to  hin,  in  the  sa.ne  way 
a.  d  does  not  use  the  word  to  indicate  anv  other  General  n 
^i^,^l^eMhree  ^.•i^e£^,.e^o_,,e,l-  ineh^ledUK  entire 


JUDGE   JONES'    HISTORY.  ^j 

army  at  New  York  at  that  tiatc,  and  received  orders  direct  from 
Washington.     And  as  to  the  statement  that  (ien.  Putnam  was 
severely  reprimanded  by  his  Chief  for  interfering  with  the  march 
of  the  mob.  it  sinks  under  its  own  inconsistency.     Putnam  was 
not  the  only  general  officer  who  appeared  on  the  scene.     The 
Moravian   pastor  Shewkirk  states  tiiat  "  So/m-  of  the  i;:cncrals, 
and  especially  Putnam  and  their  forces,  had  enough  to  do  to 
quell  the  riot,  and  make  the  mob  disperse ;"  '  and  it  is  on  official 
record  that  after  order  was   restored,   Putnam  accompanied  by 
Genera/  Mifflin,  xKho  lit  that  time  had  Washington's  confidence 
as  much  as  any  officer  in  the  army,  proceeded  to  the  New  York 
Convention  and  complained  of  the  day's  doings  on  the  part  of 
the  citizens.^     That  body  immediately  passed  resolutions  dis- 
approving the  mob.     If  Washington  dealt  out  reprimands  im- 
partially on  the  occasion,  he  must  have  had  some  for  Mifflin  and 
other  officers,  and  a  certain  ;imount  for  the  Convention.     Judge 
Jones'  version  of  the  incident  sounds  like  a  piece  of  sensational 
reporting.     There  is  no  indication  that  he  was  present  and  saw 
what  he  describes— the  very  account  itself,  indeed,   being  evi- 
dence of  his  absence.     He  has  clearly  given  us  hearsay  or  imagi- 
nation again  ;  «.ertainly,  it  is  not  history. 


VI.— FKANKI.IX   AND   HIS   SOX,   THE    NKW   JERSEY    (;OVEK\OR. 

The  Judge's  reference  to  Benjamin  Franklin  (Vol.  I.  p.  135) 
is  another  pretended  revelation  of  discreditable  secret  history. 
The  statement  is  to  the  effect  that  when  Connecticut,  according  to 
the  Judge,  became  alarmed  at  the  military  outlook  in  December, 
1776  (still  another  absurdity  to  be  exposed),  her  authorities 
released  all  the  prisoners  in  their  power  with  a  single  exception. 
This  exception  was  the  royal  Governor  William  Franklin,  of 
New  Jersey,  who,  we  are  i.iformed.  was  not  only  "  detained  and 
most  inhumanly  treated,"  but  that  "at  the  request  of  his 
father,  the  arch  rebel.  Dr.  Franklin."  But  if  the  records  are  to 
be  trusted  this  assertion  is  as  unfounded  in  fact  as  it  is  heartless. 

Governor   P'ranklin  was  detained   in  Connecticut  solely   in 

'  L.  I.  Hist.  .Soc.  .S<-rifs,  Vol.  III.  Pt.  II.  p.  108. 
'^  Joumah  of  Prov.  Congress,  Vol.  I.  p.  491. 


34 


OBSERVATIONS   OX 


consequence  of  his  own  insidious  hostilit)-  to  the  Revolution, 
and  if  his  confinement  at  ;    hiter  date  was  close  and  rigid,  his 
own  conduct  gave  the  occasion.     Upon  his  arrest  in  June,  1776, 
as  the  obstructive  governor  of  New  Jersey,  he  was  transferred 
to  Connecticut  for  safe  keeping,  where  lie  was  quartered  first  at 
Wallingford  and  then  at  Middletown  ujwn  a  liberal  parole.     On 
the  23d  of  November  following,  Congress  proposed  that  Franklin 
be  exchanged  for  General  William  Thompson,  of  Pennsylvania, 
who  was  a  prisoner  in  Canada.     Jkit  ten  days  later,  December 
3d,  that  bod)-  reversed  its  action   by  resolving  to  suspend  the 
exchange   until  further  orders,  upon   the  ground,  as  stated   by 
Hancock,  that  the  liberation  of  l'"ranklin  at  that  critical  period 
might   prove   "prejudicial   and   attended  with   some  bad 
quences"  to  the  American  cause.'      Now  when  these  resolves 
were  passed  by  Congress.  Benjamin  iM-anklin.  the  father,  riv?.s-  on 
the  AtUxntic,  making  his  vo\-age  to  I'Vance  as  one  of  the  Ameri- 
can Commissioners  to  the  Court  of  Versailles,  and  was  as  igno- 
rant of  the  above  proceedings  regarding  his  son.  the  Governor, 
as  Judge  Jones,  "the  acute  eye-witness,"  appears  to  have  been. 
The  simple  fact  is  that  Congress  would  have  exchanged  Frank- 
lin had  not  our  reverses  in  New  Jersey,  where    l'>ankliirs  influ- 
ence   would    have    been    considerable,    rendered    the    exchange 
unadvisable.       It  was    the    turn    in    the    military  situation    and 
not   his   father's  "  request"  that  led  to  the  Governor's  detention 
in  Connecticut. 

The  further  libellous  insinuation  that  it  was  Dr.  F'ranklin's 
desire  that  his  son  should  be  "inhumanly  treated  "  stands  pro- 
bably on  the  same  intangible  auth<nit\'  with  the  previous  charge. 
In  April,  1 77-,  wlien  "undoubted  information"  reached  Con- 
gress that  (iovernor  iM'anklin.  while  on  parole  at  Middletown.  had 
sedulously  employed  himself  in  scattering  1  lowe's  proclamations 
of  pardon  about  him,  thus  aiding  the  enemies  of  the  United 
States,  that  body  directeil  (iovernor  Trund^ull  to  have  him 
closely  confined  without  the  use  of  pen.  ink.  or  paper,  or  the 
access  of  any  persons  without  the  Governor's  permission. 
Franklin  was  then  removed  to  1  .itchfield,  Connecticut,  and  care- 
fully guarded.     In  July,  1777.  he  applied  for  a  release  on  parole 


Foyc,\  3th  Series,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  i.,09. 


JUD{;E   JONE       FflSTOkv 


35 


i 


o  y.s.  h.s  s.ck  w.fo  in  New  Jersey,  but  Confrress  charged  that 
he  had  again  abused  his  parole,  accusing  him  of  the  violation  of 
"so  sacred  a  tie  as  that  of  honor."  and  declined,  despite  his 
urgent  plea,  to  allow  him  a:./ freedom  within  the  American 
lines.  1  his  treatment  he  characterized  as  cruel  in  the  extreme 
wlule  Congress  justified  its  course  on  the  ground  of  the  public 
safety  and  loss  of  confidence  in  his  word. 

The  Governor  was  finally  e.xxhanged  in  the  fall  of  1778  as  a 
prisoner  of  war.  and  sent  into  New  York.  All  this  time  his 
father  ^v^s  ,n  France,  practically  beyond  the  reach  of  Congress 
which  obviously  in  this  matter  decided  for  itself  upon  every  new 
phase  o  the  (governor's  case.  Father  and  son  reconciled  their 
personal  and  political  alienafon  at  the  close  of  the  war.  blit  we 
hear  nothing  of  this  ■•  inhuman  treatment"  among  the  recollec 
tions  to  be  forgotten. 


VII.—LONNl-CTicUT    in    DK,  kmhk,..   1776. 

Leaving  the  reputations  of  Washington.  Franklin  Mei^^s 
and  Lamb  unblemished,  .so  far  as  Judge  Jones's  attempt  To' 
defame  them  is  concerned,  we  may  look  into  certain  other  state- 
ments of  this  contemporary  historian.  There  are  several  suffi- 
ciently suspicious,  upon  their  face,  to  court  investigation,  one  of 
which  seriously  affects  what  Colonel  Harry  Lee  calls  in  his 
"  Memoirs"  "  the  faithful  .State  of  Connecticut."  If  the  Jud-e 
IS  correct,  Lee  complimented  that  State  far  bevond  her  desert's 
as  must  appear  from  the  following,  in  \'ol.  I.  pp.  i34_5  .. 

"Sofardi.l  Connecticut  look  upon  the  contest  with  (ireat  Hritain  as  over 
that.n  December,  i;:!.,  the  Great  and  (,eneral  Court  not  only  released  every 
prisoner  m  the.r  ,.ower  (except  Cnvemor  Franklin,  who  was  detained  and  most 
mhurriany  treated,  and  that  a.  the  request  of  his  father,  the  arch  rehel  Dr 
hranklin),  hut  actually  appointed  and  empowered  a  committee  of  their  body  to 
proceed  to  New  York,  to  n.ake  submission  to  the  Kind's  Commissioners,  to  ask  i 
restcrat.on  to  the  KinRs  peace;  and.  if  possible,  to  preserve  their  charter  from 
forfeiture,  the.r  estates  from  confiscation,  and  their  persons  from  attainder  Hut 
the  unfortunate  action  at  Trenton,  which  happened  shortly  after,  and  the  conse- 
quent fansacuons  in  \ew  Jersey,  put  an  end  to  this  favorable  disposition  in  the 
inhabitants  of  Connecticut." 

This  surprising  statement,   if  true,   places  Connecticut,  his- 
torically, in  a  craven  position    compared  with   that  of  her  sister- 
3 


WT' 


36 


ollSERVATIONS   ON 


States  at  that  timo.  No  other  showed  the  least  disposition, 
throii^di  its  Lej^Mslature,  to  commit  such  base  terj^i\ersation, 
which  must  be  regarded  as  all  the  baser  in  the  case  of  Connect- 
icut, when  we  recall  tlie  enthusiasm  u  ith  \'  hich  her  train-bands 
marched  to  Boston  upon  the  Lexington  alarm,  and  the  large 
number  of  troops  she  furnished  the  ;irmy  in  1776.  All  her 
previous  political  professions,  moreover,  hail  been  upon  the 
side  of  resistance. 

The  accurac)'  of  the  fore<,'oin«^f  quotation  is  assunseil  in  tlie 
"  Notes"  (Vol.  I.  p.  641 )  upon  the  ^Tound  that  the  Jud<;e  was  a 
prisoner  in  Connecticut  at  that  date,  with  opportunities  for 
information,  ami  hence  "  not  likely  to  be  mistaken."  But 
judj,Mng  from  the  experience  and  fate  of  other  statements  on  his 
part,  the  Judt^e's  opportunities  for  observation  fail  to  make  him 
any  more  of  an  authority,  and  it  will  not  be  an  exceptional 
incitlent  if  we  fiiul  the  records  in  the  present  case  once  more 
offering  a  complete  contratliction  to  his  assertions. 

Connecticut  not  onl\'  did  not  look  upon  the  contest  as  over 
in  December,  1776.  but  on  the  contrary /;/(T/v?.v,v/  /icr  ixirdons 
at  hoiiu\  iitioiinii^itniir  soA/nrs  in  iniii/y,  and priparcd in  the  most 
energetic  nnviner  for  the  eontinnation  of  the  struggle.  To  enter 
into  ain-  extended  proof  of  this  must  appear  superfluous.  The 
record  is  clear  .}m\  certain.  It  was  on  the  very  darkest  of  the 
dark  tlays  of  1776 — December  :2S— that  (iovern  ^f  Trumbull 
wrote  to  Washington:  "  The  disposition  and  spirit  of  the  inhab- 
itants of  this  State  is  unaltered,  but  we  are  weakened  by  the 
constant  demand  of  men  and  every  kintl  of  clothing."  On 
December  7.  the  same  day  that  the  (Governor's  council  permitted 
Judge  Jones  and  his  fellow-prisoners  to  return  to  tlieir  homes 
on  parole,  he  wrote  : 

"  I'hc  Gen  ,al  .\sst mhly  of  this  State,  snuihl,'  of  the  va^t  inifi'itaiicc' of 
.utf/'orli,,.:  t/ir  ^iv.a  oui.ulii  i^hi.li  yoH  ,ir,-  xo  nobly  stni.;^liu^.  have,  at  their  session 
of  the  ivth  of  N.ivemljLT  ia^-t.  made  pn. vision  for  raising;  by  enlistment  tour  bat- 
t.liions  to  serve  under  your  tomniancJ  until  the  5lh  of  March  next,  before  which 
time  I  have  stro'iii  hopes  our  ((Uota  of  the  Continental  army  will  be  completed ; 
and  I  do  e.-irnestly  recommend  it  to  the  brave  olficers  and  soldiers  of  this  State 
now  in  your  army  freely  and  cheerfully  to  undertake  in  defence  of  so  ^reat,  so 
just,  and  so  ^r„od  a  cause.  The  misery  and  wretchedness  to  which  they  and  their 
families,  their  friends,  and  their  country  must  be  reduced  if  our  enemies 
succeed  are  dreadful  in  idea;  how  much  m  ire  dreadful  and  how  intolerable  to  be 
realized!" 


JUDGE  JONES'   UrsToRV 


37 


Many  o  her  s.milar  expressions  could  be  quoted,  and  it  is  to 
be  observed  that  they  are  expressions  of  fidelity  to  the  cause 
made  by  a  .overnor  officially  representing  a  like  fidelity  on  the 
part  of  Its  Legislature, 

Furthermore,  the  November  and   December  sessions  of  the 
Connecticut  Assembly,  which,  according  to  the  Judge,  debased 
■tself  so  far  as   to   offer  submission  to  the  enemy,  were  special 
sessions  /..  /.A..  .,,.  ^,,^,,,,     The  last  resolution  adopted  at 
ho  November  sitting  declared  expressly  that  "the  situation  of 
the  army   the  great  necessity  of  providing  and   forwarding,  the 
ra.snig  <,f  the  new  army,  and  of  putting  the  militia  upon  the 
best  fr>otmg.  and  the  probability  of  soon  receiving  further  Intel- 
.g'cncefn.m  Congress  and  the  army,  very  interesting  to  this  and 
he    other    Mates,    would    speedily  require  a    further  session." 
upon    ins  the  Assembly  met  again  on  t'lc  third  Wednesday  in 
December  at  Middletown.     These  two  sessions  were  held  durin<. 
the  most  critical  period  of  the  campaign,  but  all  their  acts  and 
resolutions,  of  which  an  official  summary  is  preserved   in   the 
Connecticut  archives,  were  of  a  highly  public-spirited  and  deter- 
mined   character.     All    orivate    bills   were    postponed    and    the 
needs  of  the  hour  alone  attended  to.     It  was  voted  to  thoron-dily 
reorganixe  the  militia,  to   recruit    new  regiments  for  Slate'^and 
Continental  service,  to  offer  liberal  bounties,  to  establish  a  loan- 
office   to   raise   money  to   purchase  arms,  manufacture  cannon 
and  prepare  generally  for  a   vigorous  defence.      Those   troops 
whose  term  <,f  service  was  to  expire  in  December  were  urged  by 
the   Assembly  to   remain    longer  with   Washington,  should  h. 
need  them,  '7<v-  ///<•  ,a^r  of  their  countrv  and  all  its  iucstimabu 
n^its,  themselves,  and  all  posterityr     to  check  the  exorbitant 
charges  for  provisions  made  by  monopolizers,  or  that  "  class  of 
men  uho  preferred  their  own  private  gain  to  the  iuterest,  eomfort 
andsaftyofthe  eomitryr  an  act  was  passed  governing  the  pric^ 
of  labor  and  the  necessaries  of  life.     Commissaries  in  the  difTer^ 
ent  parts  of  the  State  were  directed  to  give  information  against 
all  persons  "purchasing  up  and  engrossing"  articles  of  clothin<r 
needed   for  the  soldiers.     Word  coming  that  the  troops  in  the 
Continental  service  were  suffering  from  the  want  of  blankets   the 
selectmen  of  all  the  towns  were  charged  with  procuring  blankets 
at  once,  and  "if  a  sufficient  number  could  not  be  obtained  in 


1 


•?•  i 


38 


OBSERVATIONS   0\ 


this  manner,  that  a  warrant  should  issue  to  supj  'v  the  deficiency 
by  impressment."     Cannon  were  sent  to  Norwalk  and  Green- 
wich for  their  defence,  and  the  Governor  and  Council  authori/.ed 
to  supply  the  towns  with   "such  quantity  of  powder"  as  they 
might  require;  and  much  more  to  the  Hke  efTcct.     But  perhaps 
the   most   significant   action    on  the  part  of  the  Assembly  was 
that  taicen  in  December,  when  news  came  that  the  enemy  were 
makmg  their  wa>-  through    New  Jerse>-  towards  Philadelphia 
and    that    the    inhabitants    of    Pennsylvania   were    hurryin-  to 
Washmgton's  assistance.     It  was  then  resolved  to  encoura-c^he 
patriotism  "  so  boldly  manifested,"  and  to  call  upon  "  any  and 
all  able-bodied  men  in  Connecticut,  residing  west  of  Connecticut 
River,  cheerfully  to  go  forward  and  offer  themselves  for  the  ser- 
vice of  their  country  on  so  great  an  occasion."     A  Committee 
also  was  appointed  to  repair  to  that  part  of  the  State  "  to  arouse 
and  mnwatc  the  people   to  rise  and  exert    themselves,   u'ith    the 
greatest  expedition,  to  eherish  and  propagate  the  spirit,  ~eal   and 
ardor  for  the  eountry,  to  set  on  foot  z.'ith  all  expedition  an  enlist- 
ment  in  the  various  parts  of  the  State;  and  all  friends  of  the  eountry 
z.'ere  earnestly  exhorted  to  lend  all  their  aid  to  said  C  onnnittee  to 
promote  so  great  ana  good  a  design:'     So.  too.  when  Sir  Henry 
Clinton   landed  in   Rhode  Island  and  threatened  an  invasion  of 
the  New  England  States,  a/d  it  was  proposed  that  a  Committee 
n-om    those   States  should    meet  at    Providence  on   the  -,d  of 
December  to  provide  "  for  their  mutual  and  immediate  defence 
and  safety,"  the  Connecticut  Assembly  appointed  Messrs   Titus 
Hosmer.   Eliphalet   Dyer,  Richard   Law,  and    Nathaniel   Wales 
Jr.,  leading  men  in  the  State,  "a  Committee  to  meet  the  Com- 
mittees of  New  England,  at  Providence,  or  at  anv  other  place  at 
the  time  aforesaid,  or  as  soon  as  might  be.  toeonsult  of  the  e  xpedi- 
^■^oy  .f  raising  and  appointing  an  army  for  the  more  immediate 
d-fenee  of  \eic  hngland,  against  the  threatened  invasions  as-  urll 
asjor  a  more  general  defenee  in  the  eommon  eausr  " 

Little  confirmation  dues  this  record-and  there  is  much  more 

of  the  same  sort-contr,bute  in  support  of  J  udge  Jones's  assertion 

hat   Connecticut,   in    December,    ,;;6,   .,•  at  any  other  time. 

ooked  upon   the  contest   as  over,  and   fell    upon    her  knees  to 

beg  for  peace.     It  follows,  necessarily,  that  the  two  proofs  he 

advances  to  sustain  his  general  charge,  namelv.  that  a  Committee 


JUDGE  JONES'   HISTORY, 


was  appointed  to  make  sub 


and  that   all  the   p 


mission  to  the  King's  Com 


n 


noth 


soners    in    the    Stat 


39 


missioners 


ing  to  stand  upon.     The  resolut: 


Assembly,  above  referred  to, 

that  body  have  had  the  simplicity  t 


e   were    released,   have 

ons  and  utterances  of  the 

are  a  flat  denial  of  the  first.     Could 


C 


ommissioners  would 


o  imagine  that  the  King' 


nikl  receive  tlieir  Uommittee  witii  open  arms, 
and  engage    "to   preserve  their   charter   from    forfeiture,    their 
estates  from  confiscation,   and    their  persons   from    attainder" 
when  their  public  proceedings  at  the  very  time  were  nothin- 
less  than  successive  acts  of  rebellion  and  resistance?     Or  could 
that  Committee  have  guaranteed,  on  condition  of  pardon    to 
restore  the  State  to  its  former  allegiance,  when  its  best  people 
were  alread)-  m  arms  or  arming  either  for  the  militia  or  Con- 
tinental service  ?      Or  could  such  a  Committee  have  been  ap- 
pointed without  opposition,  and  that  opposition  not  showin- 
Itself  outside  of  the  Assembly  and  exciting  public  discussion" 
If  Judge    Jones    knew  of    the    appointment    of    such    a   Com- 
mittee, how  is  it  that  no  one  else  heard  of  it-General  Howe 
for  instance,  or  Governor  Tryon,  who  were  quick  to  report  to 
the  home  government  any  sign  of   a  favorable  disposition  on 
the  part   of  the  colonists?     The  Judge's  assertion  is  obviously 
absurd  if  not  malicious.     The  Connecticut  Assembly  could  have 
appointed  no  Committee  for  the  purpose  represented. 

In  the  Judge's  second  point— the  alleged  release  of  prisoners 
through  /,v/;_\ve  have  simply  a  second  perversion  of  fact.     The 
tory  prisoners— "  disaffected  •'   persons— of  whom  Judge  Jones 
was  one,  had  been  sent  from  New  York  into  Connecticut  at  dif- 
ferent dates  during  the  year,  some  of  them  having  been  sepa- 
rated from  their  families  several   months.     It  appears  that  in 
December,   a   number  of  these  were  released,  but  not  as  the 
Judge  implies,  in  the  sense   of  being  set  free  because  the  State 
was  ready  to  give  up  the  contest.     They  were  simpl\-/,rw/>Av/, 
and  that  upon  tltcinncn  npp/iartioii,  to  return  to  thcir'homes  and 
neglected   private   .tffairs    upon    parole   to   say  and  do  nothing 
prejudicial   to   the  American  cause  and  to  report  back  to  Con- 
necticut when  demanded.     The  Judge,  in  fact,  contradicts  him- 
self on  this  point :  for  while  in  the  extract  quoted  above,  he 
alleges  that   the  prisoners  (himself    included)  were  released  in 
consequence  of  Connecticut's  fright,  he  elsewhere  twice  asserts, 


40 


OBSERVATIONS   ON 


once  under  oath  (Vol.  II.  pp.  276,  299),  that  Governor  Trumbull 
gave  him  pcrmissum  to  return  home  and  the  Governor  in  the 
manuscript  letter  to  Governor  Clinton  uses  the  same  word  in 
the  same  connection  clearly  in  the  sense  that  the  act  was  an 
official /?Tvr.     Such  it  was  well  understood  to  be  b\'  the  other 
prisoners.      Thus    Benjamin    Whitehead.    Richard    Betts,    and 
George  Hewlett,  prominent  torics  of  New  ^'ork,  sign  paroles  on 
December  21,  I7;6.  which  contain  the  following  clause  :     .     .     . 
"Whereas,  ii/>oii  our  n/'plicatioii,  his  Honor  Jonathan  Trumbull, 
Esq.,  Governor  of  said  State  of  Connecticut,  //,it/i  permitted  us 
to  return  to  our  families  in  Xei^'  York\"  etc.     Thus  Colonel  Fred- 
erick Phillips,  Hugh  Wallace,  James  Jauncey.  James  Jauncey,  Jr., 
Gerard  Walton,  William  Jauncey.  John  Miller,  and  others  of  the 
same   place  all  apply  for  paroles.     Thus  Samuel  Burling   and 
Robert  A.  Waddell,  who  w.tl  denied  permission  in  consequence 
of  improper  conduct  at  their  quarters  a  short  time  before,  put 
in  a   plea  of  intoxication   and   say:  "We   hope  your  Honour, 
and  the  Honorable  Council,  will  reconsider  our  Case,  and  grant 
us  the  same  Indulgence  which  \-our  Honour  has  been  pleased 
to  allow  the  other  Gentlemen  in  our  situation,  and  which  is  so 
absolutely  necessary  to  our  Private  affairs."     Thus  Stephen  De 
Lancey,  of  Albany,  charged  with  being  notoriously  inimical  to 
American  liberty,  with  drinking  "  damnation  to  the  Congress," 
with  associating  with  the  enemies  of  the  country,  '•  paying  no 
regard  to  circumstance.-,   or  character,"  and    with  reporting  to 
Sir  John  Johnson  the  move  lents  of  the  army  and  the  debates 
of  the  Albany  Committee  of  Safety,  applies  for  permission  to 
return  home. 

By  this  comparison  w'th  the  official  records  in  the  case  what 
is  left  of  the  Judge's  libel  upon  the  State  of  Connecticut?  The 
records  seem  to  have  their  own  very  positive  repl\',  that  not  a 
single  statement  in  it  is  to  be  accepted  as  true.' 


'  The  references  to  the  resolutions  of  the  Connecticut  LcKlshuure  are  from 
Hinman,  who  produced  them  verbatim,  from  the  orijrina!  records  in  the  Connecti- 
cut Stale  Library.  The  paroles  are  to  be  found  in  J-otc's  A>rhh;-s.  Trumbull's 
Papers  contain  the  original  duplicates. 


JUDGE   JONES'    HISTORY. 


41 


VIII.-THE  PENNSYLVANIA  PROi  RIETARY  ESTATE. 

Not  much  better  fortune  favors  th<^  "  learned  "  Judge  when  he 
proceeds  to  divulge  and  denounce  the  methods  by  which  the 
great  proprietary  province  of  Pennsylvania  was  transformed  into 
a  republican  State.  It  was  no  minor  matter.  "  An  extraordi- 
nary and  surprising  exertion  of  the  power  of  Congress,"  he 
writes,  "shall  be  now  relrted:"  and  we  then  have  a  statement 
of  the  royal  grant  to  William  I'enn  of  the  vast  tract  of  land 
known  as  Pennsylvania,  its  revenues  and  patronage,  the  abso- 
lute  rights  of  the  proprietors  and  their  heirs,  and  finally  the  ruth- 
less change  in  the  ownership  and  system  brought  about  by  the 
Revolution.  The  points  he  desires  to  emphasize  are  as  follows 
(Vol.  I.  p.  327): 


'In  1777,  Congress,  by  a  resolution  of  their  own  divested  the  Penn  family  of 
all  the   powers   of  (lovernment,   and  the  liberties,   privileges,   and  emoluments 
granted  them  by  the  royal  charter,  without  anv  <  ..mpensation  whatever,  and  con- 
verted  the  Kovernment  from  a  kind  o!  monarch,   mto  an  absolute  republic   and 
every  ortice  which  was  in  the  appointment  of  the  proprietors,  they  made  elective 
and  dependent  upon  the  suffrages  of  the  people  at  large.     This,  it  seems,  was  not 
sufficient,  and  Congress  therefore  in    1779.  passed  another   resolution,  bv  which 
they  divested  the  proprietors  of  all  their  quit-rents,  with  the  whole  of  their  unap- 
propriated, unlocated,  and  unsettled  lands  in  the  province,  of  the  value  of  at  least 
^500,000  sterling,  and   vested  the  same  in  the  State  of  Pennsylvania,  to  be  <iis- 
posed  of  in  such  manner,  an.i  form,  as  the  Legislature  of  that  State  should  'hink 
proper,  for  the  benefit  of  the  good  people  thereof.     In  doing  this,  however,  they 
looked  upon  themselves  as  bound  in  justice  to  make  the  familv  a  compensation. 
They  accordingly  resolved  that  the  State  should  pay  to  the  proprietors,  in  lieu  of 
their  property  (thus  unjustly  taken   from   themi,  the  amazing-  sum   of  ;i"i3o.ooo 
sterling,  to  be  paid  in  instalments  without  interest,  and  the  first  pavment  not  to 
commence  till  ten  years  after  the  en.l  of  the  war.      Was  there  ever  a  greater  piece 
of  injustice,  of  villainy,  or  dishonesty  than  this  ?     Deprive  a  familv  of  the  powers 
of  government,  of  a  patronage  worth  /"7o,ooo  per  annum,  without  the  least  com- 
pensation, and  of  private  property  to  the  value  o' /,-50o.ooo,  in  consideration  of 
;6i3<>."<x>,  i)ayable  in  instalments,  without  interest,  and   to  commence  ten  years 
after  the  wa-  I     Thus  did  Congress,  by  an  arbitrary,  despotic,  and  assumed  power, 
reduce  to  indigence,  ami  almost  beggary,  a  family  possessed  under  the  Crown  of 
|)owers.  privileges,  em.iluments,  immunities,  and  a  revenue,  superior  to  half  the 
princes  in  (Germany.     Was  this  justice?     Did  the  proprietors  deserve  this  treat- 
ment  from  their  hands?     VYere  any  of  the   family  consulted  in   this  business? 
They  were  not.  Congress  made  their  own  bargain.  Congress  took  away  the  estate, 
and  Congress  stijiulated   the   consideration  money.      If  the  (iroprietors  ever  get 
/lo.ooo  of  the  stipulated  sum,  they  may  think  themselves   well  ofT.     Congress 


42 


OBSERVATIONS   ON 


f  4 


a    d  Un<l     hn  ughout  the   thirteen   clonies,  though  Krante.i  bv  the  Crown,  and 
^e  ted  such  lands  ,n   the  several  States  in  which  they  lav.      Had'  this   I.een  done 

and  that  a  fam.ly  of  fr.ends,  too,  disposses  them   of  their  property,  and  leave  a^ 
c   he,         p„,,ess,on  of   theirs,  is  a  species  of  such  bare-faced  par'talitv,  villa  nv 
and  dishonesty,  that  no  body  of  people,  crowned  head,  or  goveLent  ('theAmeri: 
can  Congress  excepted)  were  ever  guilty  of. " 

The   three  material  .statements  in   this  extract   are  open  to 
matenal  corrections.     /.>.s/-it  was  not  Conj^rrss  that   dive.sted 
the  I  enn  proprietaries  of  theirestates.     .SV.vW-the  Legislature 
oflennsylvania   alone  was  responsible    for  the   proceeclin<vs  in 
the  case,  and  presented  solid  reasons  in  justification  of  its  c.iurse 
//,/;.,/     the    1  enn    family  retained    a    co.isiderable    property   in 
lennsyvamaand  in  addition   received   the  £-,30.000  considera- 
tion „.  full  w,th  interest,  within  six  years  after  the  war- and  three 
years  before  Judge   Jones' death.     The  history  of  the   case   is 
briefly  as  follows : 

dnrilT'^o  b  ''^  ^-^^-^^^'^'7  ^'-  ^'---  ^-nily  clanned.  under 
chatter,  to  be  .sole  owners  of  the  province  of  Pennsylvania.  Its 
gwen^^ent  a..sisted  of  the  hereditary  Governor,  his  council 
.UKl  General  Assembly.  In  1775  the  latter  bod^•  n.oved  cau- 
tously  ,n  deaung  with  the  troubles  wuh  Gteat  Britain,  while 
the  Governor  oppo.sed  the  colonial  pretensions.  The  patriotic 
element  .n  the  Assembly  and  the  population  at  large.  L^::Z 
.ig  the  necesstty  of  a  more  outspoken  policy  on  tl.^part  oF tlK> 
Sa^,  organized  a  -  Provincial  Conference  of  Committees," 
nh.ch    proceeded    to  open   the   way  for  a   new  go^•ern,nent  in 

ot  Ma>  i8th,  1,76.  This  recommendation  was  a  -^enerilonc. 
extended  to  all  the  States  aliWe.  and  was  prompted  b^^l:^ 
to  suppres.s  the  exercise  in  America,  of  -all  authoritv  under  tie 
crown  of  Great  Britain."  The  majority-  of  the  States  we  e 
already  represented  by  conventions  or  assemblies  of  the  ri 'h 
cast,  and  on  June  ,8th  the  I'ennsylvania  Conference,  adopttng 
e  s,  t,,,  ,  Congress,  brought  them.selves  into  line\vith 
the.r  neighbors  by  resolving  that  the  then  existing  governm  n 

^n    r     'TT'l  '"  ^'"   '''''-'  ^'"^'   ^'^^^^  ^^  I--inciaUo:- 
vention  be  called  to  form   another  government  resting-..,//.. 


aut/wnO'  ofthcpcorlc  oulyr     Such  a  convention 


was  soon  organ- 


ri 


JUDGE  JONES'    HISTORY, 


43 


ized,  a    new  Constitution  adopted    September   28th,   1776,  and 
the  first  General  Assembly  under  it  met  on  November  28th  fol- 
lowin^r.     This  was  tlie  extent  of  the  local  revolution  in  Penn- 
sylvania m  1776,  and  it  is  difficult  to  question  the  propriety  or 
necessity  of  the  movement,  as  lon^  as  the  ri-h.  of  revolution  is 
reco-nized  at  all.     The   ownership  of  the  soil  was  not  then  in- 
volved.    At   that  date  the  Proprietary  Governor,  now  without 
ofifice,  was  John    Penn,  grandson    of   William   Penn.     "  He    re- 
mained." says  Mr.  W.  B.  Reed,  "in   Pennsylvania  and  appears 
to  have  been  a  temperate  and  inoffensive  man,  who  relinquished 
his    political    authority  without  a  struggle  and  was  content  to 
watch  with  unobtrusive  vigilance  the  more  substantial  interests 
of  his  family." 

More  than   two  years   elapsed  before  the  special  subject  of 
the  ownership  of  the  soil  came  up  in  the  Assembly.     Con-ress 
made  no  recommendation  in  regard  to  it  in   1776,  and  it  made 
none   now.     All  the  proceedings  in   the  ease  were  the  voluntary 
aetion  of  the  Pennsylvania  Legislature.     The  first  \\e  hear  of  tiie 
matter  is  in  the  message  sent  by  the  Executive  Council  throu<di 
Its  President.  Joseph  Reed,  to  the  Legislature  on  February  ^t^l). 
1779-     "We   shall   now    offer,"    says  this    document,  "  the  last,' 
though  not  the  least  object  of  your  public  enquiry  and  delibera- 
tion ;  we  mean  the  nature  and   extent   of  the  claims  or  estates 
of  the  late  proprietaries,  and  their  consistency  with  the  interests 
and   happiness  of    the    people   under  the  late    revolution.     To 
reconcile  ,  ..e  rights  and  demands  of  society  with  those  of  private 
justice  and  equity  in  this  case,  will  be  worthy  your  most  serious 
attention."     The  Assembly  took  up  the  subject  twelve  days  later, 
Pebruary  i7th.  and  notified  the  late  Governor,  John  Penn,  of  its 
intention  to  discuss  it  on  the  26th  of  the  same   month.     Mr. 
Penn  thereupon  requested  the  House  not  to  take  decisive  action 
"  until  a  reasonable  time  was  allowed  him  to  consider."  and  on 
March  loth  and  nth  it  was  voted  that  Penn  as  well  as  the  State 
be   heard   by  counsel,  the    House   declaring   itself  "  desirous  of 
doing  the  strictest  justice  between  the  people   of  the  State  and 
the  said  late  proprietaries."     On  the  18th  and  22i\  the  arguments 
were  heard  on   both   sides,  but  of  these,  as  far  as  known,  not 
even  an   outline   is   preserved.     Before   taking  final   action,  the 
Assembly  submitted  several  questions  to  Chief  Justice  McKean, 


44 


OBSERVATIONS   ON 


of  the  State  Supreme  Court,  requesting,'  his  opinion  on  the 
vaHdity  of  the  proprietors'  claims  from  a  legal  point  of  view. 
The  answers,  one  point  exxepted.  were  in  favor  ot  I'enn  ;  but  the 
Judge  was  particular  to  say  that  tliey  were  purely  /(\i,'w/ answers 
and  that  the /<j///'/W?/ situation  had  not  been  taken  into  account. 
These  questions  and  answers  together  with  the  report  of  a  Com- 
mittee of  t  ;e  .'ssembly.  taking  an  opposite  view,  were  ordered 
to  be  printe.l  :?  jth  in  English  and  German,  so  that  the  people 
of  the  State  were  well  informed  of  the  action  of  their  represen- 
tatives  in  so  important  a  matter.  Finally  on  the  24th  of  Novem- 
ber. 1779,  an  act  was  passed  by  the  Assembly,  known  as  the 
*'  Divesting  Act,"  by  which  the  title  to  the  soil  of  Pennsylvania 
was  virtuall}-  transferred  from  the  Fenn  family  into  the  hands  of 
the  State.  The  vote  in  its  favor  stood  forty  to  seven.  John 
Penn  naturally  protested  against  the  act  as  "injurious  and  repug- 
nant to  everv  rule  of  justice  and  equity."  and  liis  protest  was 
allowed  to  be  entered  in  the  minutes  of  the  Assembly. 

This  s>-nopsis  of  the  case,  which  is  substantially  the  same  as 
that  given  by  Mr.  Reed,  with  a  few  additional  tlata  taken  from 
the  Assembly's  Journals.'  at  least  settles  the  point  that  Congress 
7<.'(is //or  iv/nrr /hi/ i/i //,  iind  tbdt  Judge  Jones'  denunciations  of 
that  body  are  entirely  misapplied.  To  reverse  his  finding  in  his 
own  words.  Congress  exercised  ;/('  power,  whether  arbitrary, 
despotic,  or  assumed,  over  the  Penn  family;  did  //o/  reduce  it 
almost  to  beggar)- ;  did  //o/  make  its  own  bargain  ;  took  away  //o 
estates  and  stipulated  //o  consideration  money,  and  hence  was 
guilty  neither  of  "  partiality,  \illainy  or  dishonest}-." 

Whether  the  Penns>-Ivania  Assembh"  must  come  in  for  the 
condemnation  intended  for  Congress  is  another  question,  and 
perhaps  not  a  question  of  fact.  Judge  Jones  declares  that  a 
glaring  piece  of  robbery  was  committed  somewhere  b\-  authori- 
ty, and  that  the  great  majority  of  the  people  of  Pennsylvania 
are  enjoying  life  to-day  on  stolen  soil.  The  historical  students 
of  that  State  would  no  doubt  repel  the  insinuation,  and  could 
probably  find  ample  vindication  of  the  action  of  the  Assembly 
of  1779.     What  the  Judge  asserts  is  in  realitv  no  more  than  his 


'  AWa's  JiceJ.     Vol.  II.,  p.  166.      Jouniah  of  Pennsylvania  Assembly,  1779. 


JUDGE   JONES'    HISTORY.  45 

conviction  that  the  transfer  of  title  was  an  act  of  robbery,  while 
the  Assembly  thought  quite  otherwise.  The  question  is  open 
to  argument,  and  as  the  Judge  presents  one  view,  the  preamble 
of  the  Act  itself  may  be  inserted  here,  as  embodying  the  opposite 
or  Pennsylvania  view : 

"An  Act  for  Vesting  the  Est„t,s  of  the  late  Proprietaries  of  Pemisvhauia  in  this 
Commoniiiealth. 

Whereas  the  charter  from  Charles  the  second,  heretofore  King  of  Enuland  to 
William  Penn,  under  which  the  late  province,  now  state  of  Pennsylvania  was  first 
begun  to  be  settled,  was  granted  and  held  for  the  great  ends  of  enlarging  the 
,  bounds  of  human  society,  and  the  cultivation  and  promotion  of  religion  and 
learning;  and  the  rights  of  property  and  powers  of  government,  thereby  vested  in 
the  said  William  Penn,  and  his  heirs,  were  stipulated  to  be  used  and  enjoyed,  as 
well  for  the  benefit  of  the  settlers  as  for  his  own  particular  emolument  agreeable 
to  the  terms  of  the  said  charter,  and  of  certain  conditions  and  concessions  entered 
into  between  them. 

II.  And  whereas  the  claims  heretofore  made  by  the  late  Proprietaries  to  the 
whole  of  the  soil  contained  within  the  bounds  of  the  said  charter,  and  in  conse- 
quence thereof  the  reservation  of  quit  rents  and  purchase  monev  upon  all  the 
grants  of  lands  within  the  said  limits,  cannot  l.jnger  consist  with  the  safety,  liberty 
and  happiness  of  the  good  people  ol  this  commonwealth,  who  at  the  expense  o'f 
much  blood  and  treasure,  have  bravely  rescued  themselves  and  their  possessions 
from  the  tyranny  of  Great  Britain,  and  are  now  defending  themselves  from  the 
inroads  of  the  savages. 

III.  And  whereas  the  safety  and  happiness  of  the  people  is  the  fundamental  law 
of  society,  and  it  has  been  the  practice  and  usage  of  states  most  celebrated  for 
freedom  and  wisdom  to  cntroul  and  abolish  all  claims  of  power  and  interest 
inconsistent  with  their  safety  and  welfare;  and  it  being  the  right  and  duty  u{  the 
representatives  of  the  people  to  assume  the  direction  and  management  Of  such 
interest  and  property  as  belongs  to  the  community,  or  was  designed  for  their 
advantage. 

IV.    '' Be  it  therefore  eHiUleJ.  tiiiz."^ 

This  preamble  appears  to  be  the  only  ch;-.:Miel  through  which 
the  views  of  the  I'cnn.sylvuiia  legislators  of  1779  ean  now  be 
ascertained,  but  it  contains  enough  to  show  that  they  put  the 
broadest  construction  upon  the  Penn  charter,  and  felt  that  it  was 
intended  to  serve  ,-  ,  tth/ic  as  well  as  a  pri\'ate  purpose.  They 
seem  to  have  held  that  the  Penns  were  trustees  of  the  province, 

'  La-OS   of  the    Common-.oeallh    of    Peinisylvama.      My    Ale.x.    James    Dallas. 
Phila.  :    1797. 


asli 


46 


observatrlns  on 


liolclin.LT  (or  the  benefit  of  the  settlers  as  much  as  for  themselves, 
and  that  what  the  Revolution  justified  and  the  new  form  of 
^^overnment  reciuired  was  the  transfer  of  the  trusteeship  from 
the  family  to  the  State.  In  this  view  they  went  beyond  the 
technical  opinion  of  jmh^e  McKean.  but  perhaps  came  nearer 
to  the  intent  of  the  ori^nnal  j;rantor. 

Finallx-  the  property  reserved  to  the  Penns,  whom  the  Judge 
leaves  in  absolute  poverty,  was  large,  though  at  that  time  probably 
unproductive.     While  the  Divesting  Act  took   from  them  what 
could  properly  be  regarded   as   public  lands,  Section  VIII.  pro- 
vided that   all   their  private  estates   to   which   they  were  then 
entitled  in  their  several  right  and  capacity,  and  likewise  "all  the 
lands  known  by  the  name  of  the  Proprietary  Tenths  or  Manors" 
together  w-th  "  the  quit  or  other  rents  and  arrearages  of  rents," 
reserved  out  of  those  manors  which  had  been  sold,  should  be 
confirmed  to  the  family  forever.      It  was,  without  doubt,  to  this 
property  tha    ,,enjamin  Franklin  referred  when  he  wrote  in  1789, 
"Ihe  Penn  estate  is  still  immensely  great."'     To  complete  the 
settlement,  the  Act  also  provided  that  the  sum  of  one  hundred 
and  thirty  thousand   pounds,  sterling  money  of  Great  Britain, 
should   be  paid  to  the   legatees  of  the  Proprietaries,  both  as  a 
mark  of  the  State's  liberality  and  its  remembrance  of  the  enter- 
prising spirit  which  distinguished  the   founder  of  Pennsylvania, 
and  also  in  order  to  provide  for  such  pending  marriage  settlements 
and  wills  which  otherwise    would    be  defeated,  to  the   loss  and 
disappointment  of  the  parties  concerned.     This  money  was  duly 
paid  in  instalments,  with  interest,  the  last  pa\-ment  being  made 
upon  the  order  of  the  Supreme  Executive  Council  on  March  ^oth 
1789.'^ 


'  Letter  in  Bigelo-w's  Life  of  Fmuklin,  \\A.  III.,  p.  44S. 

»  Mi,nitcu^fthc  Su(„ancExautn,-  Coumil of  Pnm^yhmiui.  Colonial  Records 
Vol.  X\  I.,  p.  33.  See  in  this  connection  John  PennV  Journal  of  a  visit  to  some 
of  his  PennsyUunia estates  in  178S,  l\nn.  J/,;-,  of  lliston:  Vol.  III.,  No  3  p  284 


■ 


JUDGE   JONES'    HISTORY. 


47 


IX.-SCENES   AT    THK    F.VACrATION    OF   CHARLESTON    AND 

SAVANNAH. 

Another  remarkable  piece  of  history,  treasured  up  by  the 
Judge  and  now  first  broui^ht  to  H-ht.  reflects  terribly  upon  the 
conduct  of  the  Americans  upon  the  occasion  of  the  final  evacua- 
tion of  the  cities  of  Charleston  and  Savannah  by  the  British  in 
1782.  "  Sava<rely  cruel  treatment  of  the  loyalists  at  the  evacua- 
tion of  Charleston,"  is  the  reference  to  the  case  in  the  index. 
What  the  Jud<,re  reveals  is  as  follows  (Vol.  II.  p.  336): 

"  No  sooner  had  the  evacuation  taken  place  at  Charleston  than  the  rebels,  like 
so  many  furies,  or  rather  devils,  entered  the  town,  and  a  scene  ensued,  the  very 
repetition  of  which  is  shocking  to  the  ears  of  humanitv.  The  Loyalists  were 
seized,  hove  into  dunReons,  prisons  and  other  prevosts.  Some  were  t'ied  up  and 
vrhipped.  others  were  tarred  and  feathered;  some  were  dragged  t<,  horse-ponds 
and  drenched  till  near  dead  ;  others  were  carried  about  the  town  in  carts  with 
labels  upon  their  breasts  and  backs,  with  the  word  '  Tory  '  in  capitals,  written 
thereon.  All  the  Loyalists  were  turned  out  of  their  houses,  and  obliged  to  sleep 
in  the  streets  and  fields,  their  cover.ng  the  canopy  of  heaven.  A  universal  plun- 
der of  the  friends  to  government  took  place,  and,  to  complete  the  scene,  a  gallows 
was  erected  upon  the  quay  facing  the  harbor,  and  twenty-four  reputable  Loyalists 
hanged  in  sight  of  the  British  fleet,  with  the  army  and  refugees  on  board.  This 
account  (,1  the  evacuation  of  Charleston  I  had  from  a  Hritish  otficer  who  was  upon 
the  spot,  ashore  at  the  time,  and  an  eyewitness  to  the  whole.  No  doubt  the  Loy- 
alists upon  the  evacuation  of  Savann.ih  shared  the  same  fate  with  their  brethren 
in  South  Carolina." 

This  is  stronj^r  and  positive,  but  it  may  be  worth  observi  ^ 
that,  notwithstandini;  Judge  Jones  and  his  eye-witness,  all  the 
best  evidence  in  the  case  published  on  either  side  leads  to  but 
one  conclusion— ///<?/  the  occupation  of  Charleston  and  Savannah 
by  the  Americans  in  1782  zvas  effected 7.nth  the  utmost  ''order  and 
rci^uhxrity,"  and  that  no  such  scenes  of  vi'denee,  outrage,  and 
plunder  occurred.  It  is  to  be  questioned,  indeed,  whether  there 
were  any  loyalists  left  in  the  two  cities  whose  tor\-ism  was  suffi- 
ciently pronounced  antl  offensive  to  excite  the  alleged  acts  of 
retaliation.  Many  hundreds,  it  was  known,  had  embarked  with 
the  enemy,  and  these  presumably  included  all  who  had  special 
reasons  for  dreading  to  remain.  Ad\ices  from  Charleston  jjub- 
hshed  in  New  York  represented  the  whole  nundjer  of  persons 
who  left  Georgia  in  consequence  of  the  evacuation  of  Savannah 
at  nearly  seven  thousand,  of  whom  five  thousand  were  negroes. 


4'm 


48 


OHSLkVAIIONS    ON 


or  more  than  three-fourths  of  all  the  slaves  in  the  State.  The 
two  thousand  whites  inckuied  "  almost  all  the  wealthy  inhabi- 
tants of  the  province,  and  many  of  the  lower  classes  of  the 
people."  These  figures  may  or  may  not  be  e.xaggeratetl,  but 
that  the  exodus  was  large  enough  to  warrant  the  suspicion  that 
few  of  any  consequence  remained  appears  from  the  following 
schedule,  preserved  among  tiie  manuscripts  of  the  Massachusetts 
Historical  Society : 

Rcliirn  of  People  cmhatk-cd  from   South   Caro/iiia  an.t  Crorgia.     Churlcstoum,  \yh 

Deffmbir,  17S2. 


From  whence 
Embarked. 


Charlestowii , 


To  what 
pl.'icc. 


Whites. 


RIacks.      Total. 


.Men.    Wom'n.  Child'n. 


Georgia'. 


Jamaica  .  . .  . 
East  Florida 

Do. 
England.  ... 

Halifax 

.v.  York  .... 
St.  Lucia. .  . 
Jamaica  .... 
E.  Florida  .  .  . 


030 

1.17 

100 
20 

50 

32C 


300 

3  of) 

57 

74 

1.13 

40 


37s 
337 

IK) 

f'3 
121 

50 


IS,) 


130 


2613 

'f>53 

558 

56 

53 

50 

350 

iflOO 

"74'J 


fSyl 

2Q26 

900 

324 

470 

240 

370 

1650 

2SOO 


2192     :   1099        1304 


8676 


I327I 


liut  even  admitting  that  prominent  tories  remained  in  both 
places,  it  is  not  to  be  admitted  that  they  suffered  the  abuse 
described.  Take  Savannah,  the  town  evacuated  first,  at  noon, 
July  I  r.  tieneral  Wayne  commanded  the  American  force  then 
operating  in  Georgia.  A  few  weeks  before  the  enemy  departed 
a  deputation  of  tory  refugees  waited  upon  him  to  inquire 
whether,  in  ca.sc  they  remained,  their  "  persons  and  properties" 
would  be  protected.     The  (ieneral  replied  briefly  in  writing  : 

'■Should  the  Garrison  eventually  effect  an  Evacuation,  the  Persons  and 
Properties  of  such  Inhabitants,  or  others  who  chuse  to  remain  in  Savanna,  will 
be  protected  by  the  Military,  and  resigned  inviolate  into  the  Hands  of  the  Civil 
.Authority  of  this  State,  which  must  ultimately  decide. 

(jiven  at  Heail  Quarters 

June  17,  1782."' 


'  The  tiKures  opposite  Georgia  include  only  those  persons  from  that  State  who 
happened  to  sail  from  Charleston,  Dec.  13,  and  does  not  represent  the  total 
number  who  left  the  State  from  Savannah. 

"^  N.   Y.  Gazette,  Aug.  12,  17S2,  and  other  papers. 


JUDGE  JONES'   HISTOKV. 


49 


iutl 


Tak.n-  possession  o\  the  j.lace  upon  the  enemy's  departure. 
Wayne   issued   the   fcilowin-   „rder  tc,  guard   at^ainst  the  very 
excesses  which    Jud^^e  Jones  beheves  to    have   occurred  there 
That    the    (.eneral's    commands   were    hterally  obeyed    no  one 
familiar  with  his  miUtary  record  can  doubt. 

"Hkaiiuiakiiks  Savannah,  ii'i' July,  1782. 
The  light  infantry  company  under  Captain  Parker  to  take  post  in   the  centre 
work  in  front  of  the  town,  placing  sentries  at  the  respective  gateways  and  sally, 
ports,  to  prevent  any  person    or   persons   going   or   entering   the   "lines  without 
written  permits,  until  further  orders. 

.y,,  msu//,  or  depredations  to  he  committed  upon  the  person,  o,-  property  of  the 
Mtants  on  any  pretext  .ohaterer;  the  civil  authority  only  will  take  cogni/ance 
Of  the  criminals  or  defaulters  belonging  to  the  State,  if  any  there  be 

N.n.  Orders  will  be  left  with  Captain    Parker  for  the  immediate  admission  of 
the  Flom.rable  Executive  Coun.il  and  the  Honorable  Members  of  the  Legislature 
with  their  officers  and  attendants."  '  sit. 

On  the  next  day  Wayne  reported  to  General  Greene  in 
bouth  Carohna  as  follows  : 

Dkar  Gknkka,.:  "''''"'  ^'' ^'''"''^  Savannah,  July  .2,  ,782. 

The  Hritish  garrison  evacuated  this  place  yesterdav  at  12  o'clock  leaving  the 
works  and  town  perfect,  for  which  the  inhabitants  are  much  oblige.l  to  that 
humane  olhcer  Brig.  (ien.  Clarke  ....  I  have  further  agreed  that  the 
merchants  and  traders  not  subjects  of  America,  or  owing  allegiance  to  this  State 
shoul.l  have  six  months  allowed  them  t..  .lispose  of  their  goods  and  adjust  their 
concerns,  at  the  expiration  of  which  term  they  should  be  furnished  with  a 
passport  to  transport  themselves  and  property,  received  in  exchange  of  pavment 
of  their  goods,  to  „ne  of  the  nearest  Hritish  posts.  I  also  agreed  to  receive  all 
such  ct./ens  as  had  heretofore  joined  the  enemy,  on  con.lition  that  thev  inlisted 
in  the  (,eorg,a  battalion  of  Continental  troops  to  serve  as  soldiers  for  two' years  or 
during  the  war,  in  conse<|uence  of  which,  Major  Habersham  has  already  near  two 
hundred  men,  and  will  shortly  complete  the  corps  without  one  farthing  expense 
'"  '  ''■  ''"'*'"  ■  •  ■•  The  Governor  and  Legislature  meet  here  this  eveninjr 
o.  to-morrow  into  whose  ha-1s  I  shall  resign  the  civil  police."^ 

From  tiiLse  ..fficial  letters  and  orders  it  appears  that,  upon 
the  evacuation  t.f  Savannah,  General  Wayne  immediately  occu- 
pied the  place  in  person  with  a  detachment  of  Continental 
troops,  that  he  issuetl  .strin^rent  orders  against  every  kind  of 
insult  or  disorder,  that  he  prevented  the  entrance  or  exit  of 
irresponsible  parties,  that  he  granted  very  liberal  terms  to  such 

Stevens'  History  of  Geor^'ia,  and  the  newspapers  of  the  day. 
^  ^■\   y.  Gazette,  Aug.  26,  1782. 


:«^' 


50 


OHSKRVATIONS   ON 


British  merchants  as  could  not  leave  with  their  froods.  and  that 
the  only  condition  :  imposed  on  torics  who  hail  openly  joined 
the  enemy  was  their  enlistment  in  the  Continental  army.' 

Still  more  conclusive  is  the  evidence  in  the  case  of  Charles- 
Um.  which  was  not  evacuated  until  five  months  lat.    ,  December 
14.  i7«-\     Lieutenant-General   Leslie  was  in   command  of  the 
enemy   within   the  city.      iMajor-Ceneral    (Ireene.   commandinir 
the  department  of  the  South,  and  whom  Wavne  had  now  joined, 
lay  encamped  a  few  miles  distant,  awaitinjr   Leslie's  departure 
Hostilities  havin-  practically  ceased,  it  was  a^^nx-ed    bv  the  two 
commanders    that  the    evacuation    and    occupation    should    be 
effected  peaceably,  for  the  security  of  the  town   and   the  safety 
of  the  inhahi.ants.    The  British  accordingly  embarked  at  leisun- 
the  first  detachment  of  the  army  -oin-  on  board  the  transports 
at  one  o  clock  p.m.  on  the  13th.  the  second  at  3  I'.M.,  the  third 
at  7  A.M.  the   following   day,  and   the  last  two   hours   later  at 
9  A.M.     This  order  of  embarkation  in    detail   is   preserved   also 
among  the  papers  of  the  Massachusetts  Historical  Societv   the 
final  paragraph  being  as  follows  : 

.  ,„      "     re  "     J    ■    ,^ Second   embarkation   at   nine  o'clock   the 

f-^renoon^ [Saturday,  December  I4thj  consisti.,K  of  the  Roar  Guard. 


Officers.    I      Men. 


Detachment  of  Artillery 

Jagers '_ ]  _ 

Detachment  60th,  3d,  and  4th  Batt"n"  ' 
63d  Regiment 


Total. 


Total  to  eml)ark  this  day j,,. 

Total  embarkation.  .... 


3 

45 

2 

70 

() 

I  (JO 

"J 

i.)3 

30 

468 

Gadson's  Wharf. 


1290 


I     3848 

I  _  J 

J  No.  Stai'i.kton, 

A:  D:  A.   G'l." 


JUD(;E  JONES'   HISTORY 


51 


As  this  rear-f^uard  witlulreu  from  Charleston,  the  ;Vmcrican 
l.glit  infantry  marched  in.  with  (ieneral  Wayne  at  their  head. 
J  udt,rc  Jones  compels  his  readers  to  imafrine  that  officer  permittir 
his  men  to  enter  the  city  like  "  so  many  furies,  or  rathor  devils  '" 
and  conducting  themselves  in  a  shockin^Hy  inhuman  manner! 
Hut  Generals  (.reene.  Moultrie.  Horrv  and  .ther  officers  all 
present  on  the  occasion  and  all  the  best  of  witnesses,  give  us 
accounts  of  the  occupation,  which,  taken  together  and  with  t)ub- 
l.slied  Lnghsh  accounts,  render  the  Judge's  version  whoL  inad- 
missible. In  the  first  j'  ce  we  have  Greene's  report  of  the 
evacuation  to  the  I'resiv    ••  of  Congress  as  follows : 

"  Head  yiAKTF.Rs,  Hec.  k;,  1782. 
••  I  have  the  honour  to  cmmunirate  to  yt.ur  Excellency  the  .u^reeable  infor- 
tnat-on  .,f  the  evacuatu.n  of  Charlestuwn,  an.l  I.e.,  leave  to  congratulate  you  upon 

H.Jn^' r'T^'ir '''"'''■■'''''''' ""'''"'•'^'''•'"""••''^   •-»•"•  ^"J  'he  same  day   fell 
down  .nto  Rehell.on  roa.i,  and  on  the  seventeenth  crossed   the  bar  and  went  to 

Jhe'uV.'V.        T  ";■"""'""'"  ="^'  '"'""''    '"'    ^■^•"'    ^'-"^  -"'  "-   «ntishfor 
me  v\  est  India  islamls. 

General  Wayne,  with  the  legion  and  li«ht  infantry  (as  Reneral  Gist  was  absent 
and  too  unwell  to  continue  his  command)  had  been  before  the  enemy's  works  for 
several  days  previous  t..  the  evacuation.  (General  Leslie,  by  his  adjutant  general 
h.nted  to  (.eneral  Wayne,  through  Mr.  Morrice  Simmons,  one  of  the  citizens  of 
Charleston.  h>s  apprehensions  that  an  attack  from  us  miKht  lay  the  town  in  ashe. 
and  that  .f  they  were  permitte.l  t..  embark  without  interruption,  every  care  should 
lie  taken  for  its  preservation. 

Knowing  the  impossibility  of  doin«  the  enemy  any  material  injury  on  their 
embarkation  in  a  fortified  t.,wn.  and  under  cover  of  their  shi,,pinu.  and  beinu  well 
informed  that  some  attempts  h.ul  been  made  by  some  of  the  refugee  followers  of 
the  Hritish  army  before  the  place.  I  directed  the  general  to  make  the  safety  of  the 
town  the  first  object,  and  that  if  a  tr.-aty  was  necessary  for  this  purpose,  to  enter 
mtoone  rather  than  e.xpose  the  place,  for  the  little  advantage  which  might  be 
obtained  over  the  rear-guard,  The  general  acordingly,  from  the  intimation  of 
the  a.ljutant-general,  very  judiciously  agreed  to  let  them  embark  without  molesta- 
tion, they  agreeing  not  to  fire  upon  the  t.nvn  after  getting  on  board. 

"  The  con.litions  being  understood  by  both  parlies,  the  town  was  evacuated 
an,l  possesse.1  without  the  least  confusion,  our  advance  following  close  upon  their 
rear.  The  governor  was  conducted  into  his  capital  the  same  day,  the  civil  police 
established  the  day  following,  and  the  day  after  the  town  opened  for  business 

Published  by  order  of  Congress, 

CiiARi.Ks  Tiio.Mi'so.N,  Secretary."' 


General  Moultrie,  in  his  well-known  "  Mem 


oirs,"  enters  more 


I  ■ 

liii  k 


•»il 


U 


'  Painsyhania  Pocket,  Jan.  16.  1783. 


52 


OBSERVATIONS   ON 


fully  into  the  details    of    the   occupation.      Thus,    respecting 
Wayne's  entrance  into  Charleston,  he  says: 

"  General  Leslie  who  commanded  in  town  sent  a  message  to  General  Wayne, 
informing  him,  that  he  would  next  day  leave  town,  and  for  the  peace  and  security 
of  the  inhabitants  and  of  the  town,  would  propose  to  leave  their  jnivanced  works 
next  day  at  the  firing  of  the  morning  gun;  at  which  time  General  Wayne  should 
move  on  slowly,  and  take  possession;  and  from  thence  to  follow  the  British  troops 
into  town,  keeping  at  a  respectful  distance  (say  about  two  hundred  yards;)  and 
when  the  British  tioops  after  passmg  through  the  town  gates,  should  file  off  to 
Gadsdens  wharf.  General  Wayne  was  to  proceed  into  town,  -i'/iich  -I'/is  iione  with 
great  order  and  regularity,  except  now  and  then  the  British  called  to  General  Wayne 
that  he  was  loo  fast  upon  them,  which  occasioned  him  to  halt  a  little.  About  ii 
o'clock,  A.  M.,  the  Americar.  troops  marched  into  town,  and  took  post  at  the 
State-house."  ' 

Moultrie  then  states  that  at  three  o'clock  the  same  afternoon, 
General  Greene,  Governor  Matthews,  himself  and  others,  with  a 
few  citizens  and  a  guard  of  dragoons,  rode  into  Charleston,  and 
halted  in  Broad  Street.  "  There  we  alighted,"  he  continues, 
"  and  the  cavalry  discharged  to  quarters ;  afterwards  every  one 
went  where  they  pleased  ;  some  in  viewing  the  town,  others  in 
visiting  their  friends."  •  I  cannot  forget,"  adds  the  General, 
"  that  happy  day  when  >\e  marched  into  Charlestown  with  the 
American  troops ;  it  was  a  proud  di.y  to  me,  and  I  felt  myself 
much  elated  at  seeing  the  balconies,  the  doors  and  windows 
crowded  with  the  patriotic  fair,  tlie  aged  citizens  and  others 
congratulating  us  on  our  return  home,  saying,  '  God  bless  you, 
gentlemen  !  you  are  welcome  home,  gentlemen  ! '  Both  citizens 
and  soldiers  shed  mutual  tears  of  joy." 

So  also.  Colonel  Peter  Horry,  of  Marion's  brigade,  who 
accompanied  the  advance  corps  into  the  city,  describes  .somewhat 
fervently  the  scenes  of  the  occasion,  and  the  .scn,satioMs  he  felt. 

"On  the  memorable  14"'  of  December,  17S2,"  he  writes,  "  wc  entered  and  took 
possession  of  our  cai)ital,  after  it  had  been  two  years  seven  mi>nttis  and  two  days 
in  the  hands  of  the  enemy.  The  style  of  our  eiify  was  (juite  novel  and  romantic. 
On  condition  of  not  being  molested  while  embarking,  the  British  had  offered  to 
leave  the  t<nvn  unhurt.  Accordingly,  at  the  firing  of  a  signal  gun  in  the  morning, 
as  agreed  on,  they  ((iiitted  their  advance  works,  near  the  town  gate,  while  the 
Americans,  moving  on  close  in  the  rear,  followed  them  all  along  through  the  city 
down   to  th.;   water's  edge,  where  they  embarked  on  boanl  their  three  hundred 


'  Moultrie's  Memoirs,  Vol.  II.  p.  359. 


JUDGE   JONES'   HISTORY.  53 

ships^  which,  moored  out  in  the  bay  in  the  shape  of  an  immense  half  moon    pre- 
sented  a  most  magnificent  appearance.  '  ^ 

The  morning  was  as  lovely  as  pure  wintry  air  and  cloudless  sunbeams  could 
render  U,  but  rendered  far  lovelier  still  by  our/,..../.,,  if  i  may  so  call  "which 
was  well  calculated  to  awaken  the  most  pleasurable  feelings.  n  fron  w;re  he 
humble  remams  of  that  proud  army,  which,  one  and  thirty  months  a  "  Captured 
our  cty ,  and  thence,  in  the  drunkenness  of  victory,  had  hurled  menaces  and  crulh  es 
d.sgraceful  to  t  e  British  name.  And  close  in  the  rear,  was  our  band  o^  Patrts 
bend.ng  forward  with  martial  music  and  flying  colors,  to  plav  the  last'yfu  act  in  th^ 
drama  of  the.r  country's  deliverance,  to  proclaim  liberty  to 'the  captveo  recall  the 
smde  on  te  cheek  of  sorrow,  and  to  make  the  heart   of  the  wiSow  1^  p  fo      '/ 

..         Oh    U  was  a  day  of  jubilee  indeed!  a  day  of  rejoicing  never  to  be  forgot  en 
Smiles  and  tears  were  on  every  face."  '  ^'oigoiten. 

Lieut  -Colonel  Lewis  Morris,  of  General  Greene's  staff,  writinfj 
to  his  father,  says  briefly  in  regard  to  the  evacuation  :  "  This  jov 
ful  event  took  place  on  the  14-  Instant,  and  a  great  rcg^darlty 
^vas  observed  by  bofh parties."  '     Major  Alexander  Garden,  of  the 
i^egion,  aLso  leaves  the  impre.s.sion  in  his  "Anecdotes"  that  the 
city  was  occupied  in  a  quiet  and  orderly  manner.     Still  another 
eye-w.tness  was   Lieutenant  Denny,   of  the  Penn.sylvania  line, 
afterwards  Adjutant-General  of  Harmar's  Western  army.    Goin.^ 
into  Charleston  with  the  Governor,  he  had  an  excellent  oppor- 
tunity for  making  observations,  and  his  testimony  is  important 
He  writes  as  follows  in  his  journal  under  date  of  December  14 
1 782 :  ^' 

"Saw  the  last  of-the  enemy  embark  in  their  boats,  and  put  off  to  their  shipping 

A  dctachn.cnt  Irom  the  army  had  marched  before  to  take  possession  as  soon  t 
U^  English  would  be  of.      a,.,.ts  ...,W,.  ,r.,.r,tJ,  w3;  ^  1 

If.;  ■",  f''"'  ^""'f-  ""'  '"-"■'■'■  Charleston,  a  handsome  town,  situate  on 
..eck  of  land  between  the  co„,h>ence  of  Ashley  and  Cooper  rivers;  Cooper  river 
however,  appears  to  be  the  only  harbor.     Town  here  fronts  the  east;  busing 

eX^e;,^•  3  ''      "''''"''^•"'^'■'''''     ^'''>-^---)^.  and  returned  to  our  old 

Here  mc  have  the  responsible  eye-witnesses, Generals  Greene 
and  Moultrie,  Colonels  Horry  and  Lewis  iVIorris,  Major  Garden 
and  Lieutenant  Deimy,  a,l  separately  reporting  the  perfect  order 


Horry's  ami  lV,v„,s'  Life  of  General  Francis  Marion,  p.  231. 
'A^.    J-.  Historical  Sofiety  Coll.rtions,  1875,  p.  5o<). 
••  Ar<iJorj)emty's  Journal  in  Memoirs  of  the  Penn.  Hist.  Seeic/y,  Vol   III   p  -^'-i 


54 


OBSERVATIONS   ON 


attendant  upon  the  occupation  of  Charleston  when  the  British 
left  it.  Their  joint  negative  testimony  is  significant.  Not  a 
single  act  of  violence  or  disorder  is  referred  to  by  them,  and 
undoubtedly  for  the  quite  sufificient  reason  that  none  occurred. 
Add  to  all  this  the  accounts  given  by  the  enemy  themselves, 
and  the  conclusion  is  irresistible  that  Judge  Jones'  report  is 
untrue  from  beginning  to  end.  Thus  in  Rivington's  New 
York  Ga::cttc  for  January  4,  1783,  we  have  the  followine : 

"The  Honorable  Lieutenant  General  Leslie,  Commander-in-Chief  of  Charles- 
town,  with  his  Suite,  arrived  here  on  Thursday    in  perfect  health 

Immediately  on  the  embarkation  of  the  King's  troops,  at  Charles-Town,  the 
rebel  General  Wayne  with  about  5000  Continental  Soldiers,  took  possession  of  the 
town,  leaving  a  body  of  cavalry  to  guard  the  passes,  with  strict  orders  not  to 
molest  any  person  going  to  the  shipping.  The  rebels  were  so  extremely  polite, 
after  the  embarkation  of  the  garrison,  as  not  to  hoist  the  rebel  standard  for  three 

days,  while  the  English  fleet  lay  in  the  Bay We  learn  further,  that  when 

Gener.nl  Wayne  took  possession  of  Charles-Town,  he  ordered  the  houses  that  were 
shut  up  to  be  opened,  treated  tlu-  inhabitants  r.vV//  cil-ilitv,  and  permitted  them  to 
carry  on  business  as  usual.  That  flags  from  the  enemy  had  been  received  on 
board  after  the  evacuation,  that  the  treaty  between  the  Governor  and  merchants 
had  hitherto  been  inviolably  held." 

Again,  in  the  Gazette  of  January  8,  "  some  further  particulars 
respecting  the  dereliction  at  Charlestown"  are  reported  as 
follows  : 


"  On  Saturday  the  14"'  ult.  the  business  of  evacuating  Charlestown,  the  metro- 
polis of  South  Carolina,  w.hs  completed.  The  troops  and  stores  having  been  pre- 
viously embarked,  his  Majesty's  ship  Carolina,  the  Honourable  Alexander  Coch- 
rane, Esq.,  Commander,  which  had  been  appointed  to  cover  the  embarkation, 
remained  several  hours  very  near  the  wharfs,  after  the  British  fleet  had  fallen  down 
towards  the  Bar,  and  the  rebel  army  taken  possession  of  (he  town.  Several 
parties  of  rebel  cavalry  and   infantry  paraded  opposite  to  his  Majestv's  ship,  but 

they  neither  offered  nor  received  any  insult We  hear,  that  before  Charleston 

was  evacuated  it  was  insisted  upon  by  the  Hon.  General  Leslie  and  complied  with 
by  Mr.  Green,  that  nocorps'of  the  country  militia  should  be  permitted  to  enter  the 
town  until  the  expiration  of  ten  days  after  the  British  troops  left  it,  bv  which  time 
it  was  presumed  that  those  merchants  whose  embarrassments  compelled  them  to 
remain  in  the  town,  might  get  their  property  secured." 

These  several  extracts  speak  for  themselves,  but  hardl\'  for 
Judge  Jones.  If  the  latter  is  correct,  we  must  believe  'that 
Greene,  Moultrie,  Wayne,  the  Governor  and  others  in  authority, 
countenanced  the  gros.sest  excesses,  occurring  under  their  eyes! 


JUDGE  JONES'    HISTORY 


55 


ives 


Of  course  they  d.d  not  occur.  The  whole  story,  indeed,  rece.vc. 
.  s  quietus  from  Rivingtons  Gazette,  which  says  nothing  about 
those  twenty-four  reputable  loyalists"  who  were  hanged  in 
s.ght  of  the  British  fleet.  Sir  Alex.  Cochrane,  whose  ship  lay 
nearest  the  town  does  not  seem  to  have  reported  that  interest- 
ing fact  in  New  York  ;  nor  did  any  one  else  on  board  the  fleet 
mention  the  episode.  This  alone  is  sufficient  to  offset  our 
contemporary  Judj,    .uid  his  unnamed  witness 


X.— THE  NEW  YORK  ACT  OF  ATTAINDER. 

As  to  this  Act  which  the  Judge   brings  forward   as  an  illus- 
tration of  the  "injustice"  and  "dishonesty"  of  the  Revolution- 
ary legislature   of  the  State  of  New  York,  it  is  to  be  said  that 
no  complete  or  impartial  history  of  it  can  be  written  so  lono-  as 
there  does  not  exist  on  reeord  a  single  line  expressive  of  the  viexvs 
and  motives  of  the  men  -who  framed  and  supported  the  Aet      We 
are  absolutely  in  the  dark  as  to  the  reasons  and  explanations 
given  by  the  members   of  the  Legislature  to  justify  their  votes 
m  the  case.     W  ithout  this  record  any  consideration   of  the  Act 
must  be  unsatisfactory.     Preeminently  is  Judge  Jones'  review 
of  It  unsatisfactory,  as  it  is  the  review  of  one  against  whom  the 
Act  was  to  operate  and  whose  facts  and   conclusions  in  other 
important   matters  have   been  found  to   be  entirely  worthless. 
One  or  two  of  his  points,  however,  may  be  noticed. 

In  the  first  place,  the  Judge  assumes  to  know  precisely  why 
he  was  included  in-the  Hill  as  one  of  the  enemies  of  the  State 
whose  person  ought  to  be  attainted  and  property  confiscated, 
but  without   making  it  clear  to   the  reader.     On   page  282-3' 
Vol.  II..  we  are  informed   that  it  was  because  he  ordered  "the 
discharge  of  four  tories  from  jail  in  Westchester  County  while 
holding  Court  there  in  the  fall  of  1775.      "This  official'action 
was  the   reaH)n  given  afterwards  by  a   leading  member  of  the 
House,  to  a  friend  of  the  Judge,  why  he  was   included  in  the 
Act  of  Attainder,  &c."     Again  on  page  304.  at  the  close  of  his 
"Case     and    elsewhere,  he   claims   that    his  adherence   to   the 
enemy,  charged   in  the  Act,  was  nothing  more  than  living  upon 
his  own  estate  on  Long  Island  as  a  prisoner  under  parole.     And 


I: 


1*1 


56 


OBSERVATIONS   ON 


■ 


finally  he  holds  on  pages  290-3  that  he  was  attainted  and  pro- 
scribed on  the  charge  of  having  broken  his  parole  in  not  re- 
turning to  Connecticut  when  called  for  by  Governor  Trumbull 
in  the  summer  of  1777.  The  Judge  insists  that  the  New  York 
Legislature  did  bring  this  charge  against  him.  and  then  he  en- 
deavors to  show  that  it  was  "a  frivolous  pretence  only."  But 
this  is  a  charge  not  proven.  There  is  no  evidence  whatQver 
that  New  York  took  any  notice  of  his  presumed  breach  of 
parole  to  the  Connecticut  governor.  In  fact  the  letter  of  Gov- 
ernor Trumbull  of  March,  1780.  to  Governor  Clinton,  quoted 
ante,  and  Clinton's  reply,  go  to  show,  rather,  that  the  facts  in 
the  case  were  not  generally  known,  and  that  the  New  York 
Legislators  had  no  ofificial  data  to  guide  them.  The  presump- 
tion is  all  the  other  way.  If  it  has  been  shown  that  Governor 
Trumbull  did  not  charge  the  Judge  with  a  breach  of  his  parole, 
it  is  wholly  improbable  that  the  Legislature  of  New  York  did. 
What  the  Judge  states  on  the  pages  referred  to,  290-3,  thus 
seems  to  have  no  force  or  point. 

The  Act  of  Attainder  says  no  more  than  that  "  divers  per- 
sons," of  whom  the  Judge  was  one,  had  been  voluntarily  adherent 
to  the  King  with  intent  to  subvert  the  liberties  and  government 
of  the  State,  and  that  hence  as  a  measure  of  public  safety  and 
justice  their  properties  ought  to  be  confiscated  and  themselves 
banished.  As  Judge  Jones  had  defied  or  ignored  the  authority 
of  the  Provincial  Convention  in  the  summer  of  1776;  as  he  had 
been  deemed  dangerous  enough  to  be  arrested  by  Washington's 
order;  as  he  voluntarily  remained  a  prisoner  under  parole  and 
by  that  very  status  proved  himself  an  "  adherent"  to  the  en- 
emy; and  as  he  held  property  within  the  State  of  New  York, 
whose  government  he  wished  to  see  overthrown,  it  is  not  dififi- 
cult  to  understand  how  he  came  to  be  included  in  the  Act  of 
Attainder. 

The  further  charge  from  the  Judge  that  the  Act  was 
prompted  by  "  malice,  revenge  and  political  resentment"  is  one 
which  would  naturally  be  made  by  him  ;  but  his  proof  is  incon- 
clusive. According  to  the  Act  onlj-  "  the  most  notorious  of- 
fenders"  were  included  in  the  list.  Selection  was  necessary. 
The  State  of  Pennsylvania  had  already  proceeded  in  the  same 
manner,   naming    "divers    traitors"   for   attainder.      Delaware, 


JUDGE    TONES'   HISTORY. 


57 


Georgia  and  South  Carolina  had  their  Confiscation  Acts  and  hsts 
of  proscribed  domestic  enemies.     The  Act  of  Attainder  passed 
by  Parhament  after  the  Scotch  RcbeUion  of  1746,  to  which  the 
Judge  refers,  included  about  eighty  prominent  individuals.     In 
every  case  some  choice  had   to  be  made.     In  the  case  of  New 
York  the  matter  was   clearly   a   most   delicate   one,  since  the 
members  of  the   Legislature  had  to  deal  largely  with  former 
political    opponents.       Some    they   dropped;    others    they    in- 
eluded;  and  the  Judge   sees  in   this  nothing  but  partiality   vin- 
dictiveness  and  villany.     But   all  he  has  to  offer  in  the  way  of 
proof  IS  inference  and  speculation.     He  knnu  nothing  about  the 
matter.     We  need  better  informed  witnesses   before  a  verdict 
can  be  entered  on  this  point  of  motives.     The  entire  subject, 
to  repeat,  requires  much  more  documentary  light  thrown  upon 
It  before  it  can  be  fairly  and  intelligentl\-  discussed.     The  Jud-e 
has  treated  it  only  from  the  standpoint  of  an  avowed  enemy.'" 


XI.-GOVERNOR  TRYON  AXD  THE  CONNECTICUT  RAID,  1779. 

Passing  within  the  enemy's  lines,  we  find  Judge  Jones' 
hostility  to  Sir  Henry  Clinton,  the  British  Commander-in-Chief, 
as  deep-seated  and  bitter  as  it  is  towards  the  "  rebels"  and  their 
revolution.  The  general's  failure  to  suppress  the  latter  is  the 
explanation  of  the  matter.  Allowing  for  the  moment  that  the 
Judge's  delineation  of  Clinton  has  been  drawn  with  an  honest 
belief  of  its  life-likeness  and  truth,  and  from  purely  disinterested 
motives,  we  must  picture  this  British  generalissimo  as  being  a 
man  without  honor,  without  morals,  without  stability,  morose  in 
disposition,  weak  in  his  "  intellects,"  a  peculator  while  in  high 


'  It  would  appe.ir  from  the  editor*  preface  that  the  Judge  remained  under  the 
act  of  banishment  as  lon^  as  he  lived,  or  otherwise  he  might  have  returned  to 
this  country.  It  appears,  however,  that  in  i7.,o  the  Legislature  passed  a  bill, 
Ayes  32,  Nays  i3,  permitting  him  to  return  and  remain  here.  The  late  Mr. 
O'Callaghan  in  a  note  in  the  ///,f/,v;V,// J/„. .„:/„. ,  1858,  Vol.  II.,  p.  14S-9,  says  : 
"  Though  this  Act  is  omitted  by  Greenleaf,  it  is  on  file  in  the  office  of  the  Secre- 
tary of  State,  Albany,  and  included  the  names  of  James  Jauncv.  Abraham  C. 
Cuyler,  William  Smith,  Wm.  Axtell,  Thomas  Jones,  Richard  Flo'vd  and  Henry 
Floyd,  the  elder." 


58 


OBSERVATIONS   ON 


command,  governed  by  a  rebel  spy,  spurning  good  and  true 
loyalists,  and  as  a  military  officer  a  mere  incapable,  utterly  unfit 
to  be  at  the  head  of  his  Majesty's  forces  in  America.  The  Judge, 
in  short,  attacks  Sir  Harry  at  about  every  assailable  point  which 
the  human  character  presents.  In  particular,  he  ridicules  his 
military  qualifications,  and  unsparingly  criticises  his  entire  mili- 
tary career. 

It  is  not  for  the  purpose  of  defending  the  British  Commander- 
in-Chief  that  attention  is  called  to  this  rough  handling  he 
receives  from  the  author.  It  is  simply  the  question  over  again, 
Does  Judge  Jones  sustain  himself  here,  with  any  better  success,' 
as  a  uniformly  accurate  narrator  ?  The  examination  of  a  few 
points  may  determine. 

Take  for  example  the  events  of  1779— Tryon's  Connecticut 
raid  and  the  storming  of  Stony  Point.  The  former  movement 
appears  to  have  grated  on  the  Judge's  feelings  so  harshly  that 
relief  could  only  come,  as  we  may  infer,  by  charging  all  the 
burning,  plundering  and  desecration  committed  by  the  British 
at  the  towns  of  New  Haven,  Fairfield,  and  Norwalk  directly 
upon  Clinton  and  his  orders.  The  responsibility  is  fixed  upon 
him  in  person,  and  the  officers  in  charge  of  the  expedition 
so  far  relieved  of  all  blame.  There  is  no  uncertainty  as  to  the 
author's  meaning  and  intent  on  this  point. 


13  ^'^ 


"  From  the  well-known  humanity,  charity  and  generosity  of  General  Tryon," 
he  writes  (Vol.  I.  p.  315),  "no  man  in  his  perfect  senses  can  ever  imagine  that 
the  troops  under  his  command  were,  with  his  consent,  suffered  to  plunder  peace- 
able mhab.tants,  towns  to  be  burnt,  holy  buildings  destroyed,  and  thousands  of 
mnocent  mhabitants  of  both  sexes,  and  all  ages,  and  the  greater  part  loyalists  to 
be  d.vested  of  all  the  comforts  of  life  and  turned  into  the  open  fields,  no  habita- 
tions to  protect  them,  exposed  to  the  inclemency  of  the  weather,  and  covered  bv 
the  canopy  of  heaven  only.  General  Tryons  humanitv  was  such  that  nothing  but 
express  orders  could  have  induced  him  to  act  a  part  so  inconsistent  with  his  well- 
known  and  established  principles.     Clinton  was  at  this  time  Commander-in-Chief." 

It  happens,  however,  that  the  unfavorable  impression  of  Clin- 
ton which  the  Judge  seeks  to  perpetuate  in  this  extract,  is  entirely 
dispelled  by  Tryon's  own  pen.  Thus  to  Lord  Germainc  he  wrote 
July  28,  1779:  "  The  honor  of  your  Lord"'s  duplicate  dispatch 
of  the  5'"  May  No.  21  afforded  me  the  greatest  satisfaction  in  the 
Kings  approbation  of  my  conduct  on  the  Alert  to  Horse  Neck 


JUDGE   JONES'    HISTORY.  jc^ 

It  will  be  an  additional  comfort  to  mc  if  my  late  expedition  on  the 
Coast  of  Connecticut  tnects  the  same  royal  testimony."  '  As  if  to 
emphasize  his  own  approval  of  the  affair,  he  adds :  "  My  opin- 
ions remain  unchangeable  respecting  the  utiHty  of  depradatory 
excursions.  I  think  RebeUion  must  soon  totter  if  those  exer. 
tions  are  reiterated  and  made  to  extremity." 

Tryon  in  due  time  had  the  happiness  to  receive  a  favorable 
reply  from  the  home  government,  and  in  returning  his  acknowl- 
edgments to  Germaine,  wrote  Feb.  26,  1780:  "I  am  honored 
with  your  Lordships  Dispatches  of  the  4'"  Nov'  and  circular 
letter  of  the  4"'  Dec'  and  d^nvG great  comfort  from  His  Majesty's 
gracious  approbation  of  my  conduct,  and  the  officers  under  my 
command  on  the  Connecticut  Expedition  last  summer." 

These  few  expressions  on  the  part  of  the  leader  of  the  raid 
sufficiently  answer  Judge  Jones  as  to  the  former's  conduct  and 
responsibility.  The  last  official  reference  which  Tryon  seems  to 
have  made  to  the  subject  appears  in  the  following  note  he  sent 
to  Governor  Trumbull  just  before  his  departure  for  England: 

rn.,  ,•    .    1  "New  York,  19th  April,  1780. 

[Duplicate.]  f     <     1 

Sir,  I  take  the  opportunity  by  a  Prisoner  on  Parole  to  send  vou  a  few  of  the 
Publications  of  this  City,  particularly  the  benevolent  Proclamation  of  the  Com- 
mander-in-Chief and  my  successor  Governor  Robertson,  which  when  laid  before 
your  Council  and  Published  in  your  Papers,  may  pave  the  way  for  a  happy  Recon- 
ciliation. 

As  General  Robertson  has  succeeded  me  both  in  my  civil  and  military  command, 

I  shall prohahly  not  visit  your  coast  any  more,  but  return  to  England  the  first  favor- 
able occasion  to  repair  a  Constitution  much  impaired  in  the  service  of  my  King^ 
and  Country. 

With  my  hearty  wishes  that  the  hour  may  be  near  at  hand  when  the  Prodigal 
children  shall  return  to  the  Indulgent  Parent, 

I  am 
Sir, 

Your  Most  Obe'"  Servant, 

Wm.  Tryon."* 


'  N.   Y.  Colonial  Docs.,  Vol,  8,  p.  768. 

»  Trumbull  Papers,  Mass.  Hist.  Society,  Vol.  XI.,  p.  144.  Clinton's  orders  tcv 
Tryon  before  he  left  New  York  were  produced  for  the  first  time  in  Capt.  Chas.  H. 
Townshend's  pamphlet  on  the  British  invasion  of  New  Haven,  issued  last  year  on 
the  occasion  of  the  centennial  of  that  alifair.  These  orders  say  nothing  about 
burning  of  houses,  plundering,  etc.,  but  simply  authorize  the  destruction  of  ship- 
ping and  stores,  carrying  off  of  cattle,  and  the  employment  of  the  expedition  in 
distracting  the  "rebels." 


Iff 


6o 


OBSERVATIONS   ON 


XII.-SIR   HENRY    CLINTON    AFTER    THE    STORMING    OF    STONY 

POINT. 

The  Judge  makes  a  new  and  extraordinary  statement  in 
regard  to  Clinton's  movements  immediately  upon  his  hearing  of 
Wayne's  Capture  of  Stony  Point,  July  i6,  1779,  The  greater 
part  of  the  British  army  at  that  date  was  encamped  in  the 
vicinity  of  Mamaroneck,  close  to  the  Connecticut  border.  It 
was  Clinton's  intention  to  make  or  support  further  demonstra- 
tions in  that  State  in  the  hope  of  drawing  Washington  away 
from  the  Highlands  to  its  protection.  In  that  case  an  oppor- 
tunity might  offer  of  meeting  him  in  the  open  field.  But  the 
re-capture  of  Stony  Point  by  the  Americans  deranged  these 
plans  and  compelled  Clinton  to  move  up  the  Hudson  again  to 
re-establish  his  posts  there.  Clinton's  particular  movements  on 
and  after  the  i6th  of  July  are  described  as  follows  by  the 
Judge : 

While  encamped  in  Westchester  County  near  the  Connecticut  line,  as  stated, 
General  Clinton,  says  the  judge  (Vol.  I.  p.  312),  "  received  an  express  acquainting 
him  that  the  garrison  at  Stoney  Point  had  been  surprised,  and  made  prisoners  of, 
and  conducted  to  the  rebel  army,  and  that  the  garrison  at  Verplanck'  Point  ex- 
pected an  attack  every  hour.  Whether  the  General  ai)prehended  the  city  of  New 
York  in  danger,  or  the  garrison  at  X'erplanck's  Point  of  little  consequence,  no  re- 
inforcements were  sent  to  the  latter.  The  Gencial  mairh,\'  -.i'ith  his  -.^Iwlc  army 
Jor  A'i-,i<  York,  all  the  hay  makers  with  their  covering  parties,  were  called  in.  The 
whole  manhed  lo  Kiu^shrhls,',  fnssrd  the  Ilarhm,  and  entered  the  island  of  New 
York.  Most  of  them  wre  ,/iiartered  in  the  eity.  The  remainder  in  its  emirons. 
The  lines  at  Kingsbridge  in  the  meantime,  were  left  t<j  be  defended  by  a  refugee 
corps,  some  German  Chasseurs,  a  few  Ansiiachers,  some  Hritish,  and  a  few  pro- 
vincials, a  motley  crew  consisting  of  not  more  than  i,o<x>  men.  Clinton  estab- 
lished himself  in  the  city  of  New  York  with  about  20,000  men,  a  large  body  of 
militia,  and  a  numerous  train  of  artillery,  and  the  island  besides  was  surrounded 
by  at  least  forty  men-of-war.     All  this  because  .Stoney  Point  had  been  surprised." 

The  Judge  here  puts  it  upon  record  as  a  matter  of  history, 
that  General  Clinton,  who  had  moved  forward  expressly  to 
operate  upon  Washington's  flank  and  if  possible  draw  him  into 
an  open  engagement,  became  so  thoroughly  frightened  at  the 
news  from  Stony  Point  as  to  retreat  precipitately,  with  all  his 
men,  to  New  York,  where  according  to  the  author's  own  state- 
ment,  made  elsewhere,  no  defensive  works  existed,  and  there 
seek  safety  under  the  guns  of  his  ships.     Put  did  this,  or  any- 


JUDGE  JONES'   HISTORY. 


6l 


thing  of  the  sort,  occur?     The  correct  records  again  authorize 
a  deniil  of  the  entire  statement. 

In  the  first  place,  we  have  Chnton's  own  report  in  which  he 
states  that  he  marched  to  Stony  Point  as  soon  as  he  had  the 
news  of  its  loss.  "  Upon  the  first  intclUi^encc  of  this  matter r  he 
writes,  "  /  ordered  the  army  to  advance  to  Dohhs  Ferry,  pushing 
forward  the  Cavalry  and  some  light  troops  to  the  banks  of  the 
Croton  river,  to  a-we  the  enemy  in  any  attempt  by  land  against  Vcr- 
plank's.  Brigadier-General  Stirlini^r  ;vas,  in  the  meantime  em- 
barked with  the  42d,  63d  and  64th  regiments,  for  the  relief  of 
Verplank-'s,  or  the  recovery  of  Stony  Point.  The  northerly 
winds,  rather  uncommon  at  this  season,  opposed  Brigadier- 
General  Stirling's  progress  til!  the  19th  ;  when,  upon  his  arriving 
within  sight  of  Stony  Point,  the  enemy  abandoned  it  with  pre- 
cipitation,  and  some  circumstances  of  disgrace."  ' 

In  the  next  place  General  Pattison,  Commandant  in  New 
York  City,  -eported  substantially  the  same  thing  as  follows : 
"Lieut.-Col.  Webster  maintained  his  ground  [at  Verplank's 
PointJ  with  great  spirit  'till  the  corps  arrived  under  Brigadier- 
General  Stirling,  x.'hieh  upon  the  first  notiee  of  the  misfortune  at 
Stony  Point,  was  detached  from  Camp  to  support  him.  Sir  Henry 
Clinton  at  the  same  time  moved  the  remainder  of  the  army  for- 
Avards  from  Phillipsbourg  to  Dobbs'  Ferry."-' 

Conclusive  against  Judge  Jones  as  these  two  reports  prove 
to  be,  ample  confirmatory  evidence  is  to  be  found  in  the  manu- 
script dispatches  of  those  American  ofificers  who  commanded  at 
the  front,  closely  watching  Clinton's  movements.  General 
Heath  with  the  Connecticut  Line  had  been  detached  to  cover 
the  roads  leading  from  Mamaroneck.  General  Parsons  was  at 
Stamford,  and  General  Wolcott,  with  Connecticut  militia,  at 
Horseneck.  Parsons  sent  brief  messages  on  the  i6th  and  17th 
to  Heath  with  information  that  the  enemy  had  not  all  retired 
from  Mamaroneck.  Wolcott  reported  on  the  i8th  that  his  ac- 
counts satisfied  him  that  at  that  date  they  had  all  gone  "  to- 
wards Hudson's  River.""  On  the  19th,  Heath  at  Mandeville 
sent  word  back  to  Wolcott  :     "  The  enemy  have  moved  towards 

'  London  Gazette,  October  5th,  1779. 

"^  Pattison  s  /.,rters,  N.  V.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  1S75. 

■^ Heath  Papers,  Mass.  Hist.  Soc. 


I 


62 


OHSERVATIONS   ON 


1 


King's  ferry  in  Force."     To  Washington  on  the  same  date,  he 
vrote:     "  By  intelligence  received    since  I    had    the   honor   to 
write  in  the  morning,  I  learn  that  the  enemy's  advance  sentinels 
and  videts  were  posted  the  last  night  on  the  New  Ikidge  [Croton 
River]:'"  and   this  is  confirmed  by  Simcoe  in  his  "  Journals." 
Finally  on  the  19th  also.  Wolcott  writes  a  detailed   account  of 
the   enemy's  movements,  giving  the   names  of  the  Corps  and 
where  some  of  them  quartered.     The  last  troops,  he  reports,  left 
Mamaroneck  "at   6  o'clock   Saturday  A.  M.   [the    17th [—The 
17th   Lt.  Dragoons,  the   Legion,   Simco.   Rawdon's  Volunteers 
moved    on    the    North    Road    to    Phillipsburgh    |the    present 
Yonkers].  the  others  on  the  road  to  East  Chester   fileing  off  to 
the  Right   and   passing  the  Mile  Square  to   the  Same   Place— 
Genl.  Tryon's  troops  landed  at  Frogs  Neck  and  marched   for 
Phillipsburgh  to  join  the  Commander-in-chief.     A  young  gentle- 
man  who   returned   from  Phillipsburgh  mentions  the  embarka- 
tion of  Troops  in  the  North  River— the  numbers  he  could   not 
tell.     .     .     .     General  Parsons  will  easily  apprehend  thro  what 
channel   this  Intelligence   is   reed."      This  channel,  it  appears, 
was  one  of  General  Parsons'  friends,  a  Mr.  Mornt.  of  Mamaro- 
neck. who    gave    the   information    to  N.   Frink   whom   General 
Wolcott   had   sent   into  the  village  for  news.^     The  important 
point  in  the  report  is  the  confirmation  which  "  the  young  gentle- 
man," Grififin,  gives  to  Clinton's  and  Pattison's  statement  that 
troops  were  embarked  from  Camp  at  Yonkers  for  Stony  Point, 
the  moment  its  capture  was  reported. 

Taking  these  several  reports  and  messages,  both  British  and 
American,  written  in.  the  field  and  at  the  time,  and  they  justify 
onl\-  one  conclusion— that  the  entire  British  force  in  West- 
chester County  moved  forward  and  not  hackxmrd  to  New  York, 
on  and  after  July  i6th,  1779.  Did  Judge  Jones  sec  the  British 
army  crowded  around  the  City  at  that  date,  that  he  so  positively 
assures  posterity  that  Clinton  acted  the  coward  on  the  occasion? 
No  such  sight  could  have  greeted  his  eyes.  He  nevertheless 
gives  us  the  record  of  it  which  is  as  curious,  absurd  and  false  as 
hearsay  or  imagination  could  make  it. 


'  Heath  Papers,  Mass.  Hist.  Soc. 

"^  Wolcott  Papers,  ^o\.  I.  Conn.  Hist.  Society,  Hartford. 


JUDGE  JONES'   HISTORV. 


^i 


XIII.-KNYPHAUSEN-S  MOVE  UPON  WASHINGTON  IN  ,780. 

Another  effort  to  damafrc  Clinton's  record  and  make  liim 
out  as  worthless  and  incompetent  as  possible  is  made  by  the 
Judge  in  noticing  movements  in  the  vicinity  of  New  York  m 
the  summer  of  1780.     In  Vol.  I.  p.  355,  he  says : 

mani/er  i'„'ch't"t*'  "v  ^T'  '''°'  ""'"""'  •^"VP^ausen.  who  was  then  Com- 
mander-  n-Ch.cf  m  New  York,  entered  New  Jersey  at  the  head  of  an  armv  con- 
s.st.ngof  severa  thousand  men.  determined  to  brinK  Washington  to  a'eneral 
b  Utie,  or  drive  h.m  out  of  the  province.  He  proceeded  as  far  as  Sprii.fie  d 
about  th.rty  miles  from  Eli.abethtown,  the  place  where  the  British  armv  'd'' 
Knyphausen  was  several  times  during  his  march  attacked  bv  the  rebel  mil  rfn 
conjunction  with  detachments  from  the  Continental  army.    The  rebels  wer'alw;!" 

ztatatt  """"■^''"^"- j;i'^"^'''^'' '"''  '"-'■  washin;,'.r ::;;'; 

come  to  a  battle,  or  g.ven  up  the  Colony.  A  fair  battle  was  all  the  old  German 
wanted.  He- now  thought  himself  sure  of  it.  But  fortune  favored  Washi'Z 
durmg  the  whole  war.  It  now  appeared  in  his  favor  again  in  a  most  conspi  u^  " 
armi  !'in  V  7  ''"'  ''""  '"'  "'  ''"'  '"°"'^-  ^"''^  "^^  "^<'-h  and  rebel 
a  rTed  Lm  V"r"'  ""'J"  '''  "'""'""  '"'""'  ''•^^"'^-''  ''— '  Linton 
WhetherClmton  thought  Knyphausen  would  gain  too  much  honor  should  he  force 
Was  mgton  to  attle.  defeat  him.  and  break  up  the  rebel  army,  or  bv  wha^:h 
motives  mduced.  .s  known  only  to  himself  and  his  orivv  council.  He  instantlv 
SuTen  llbnd"     "'""'  ''^  ""■'  '^"'"  ^"'  Jersey,  and' ordered  it  to  repair  to 

The  impression  the  Judge  desires  to  fix  in  the  reader's  mind 
here  ..:  that  but  for  C7n//<»rs  untimely  appearance  and  counter- 
manding  orders     Knyphausen    would     in    all    probabilitx-  have 
measured  his  strength  with  Washington,  and  driven   hini    from 
the  Jerseys.     "  A  fa-V  battle  was  all  the  old  German  wanted      He 
now  thought  himself  sure  of  it."     But  the  reader  need  not   go 
far  to  ascertain  that  Knyphausen  had  ^r/rau/y  marched  out,  had 
his  fighting,  exhausted  his  movement,  failed,  retired  and  fortified 
himself  at   his  starting  point   at  Amboy./////  om-  wvk   before 
Clinton  arrived  upon  the  scene.     The  simple  fact   is   that    Kn\-p- 
hausen  attempted,  in  Clinton's  absence,  to  surprise  \\'ashin.r[on 
HI  his  Camp  at  Morri.town,  but  he  met  with  so  much  resistance 
on  the  road  from  the  Jersey  militia  that  after  getting  as   far  as 
Springfield  and  finding  a  surprise  out  of  the  question,  he  wi.selv 
decided  to  turn  back.     The  affair  was  reported    to   the   home 
government  b>-  (General  Robertson  in   Knyphausen's  name,  in  a 


ill 


64 


OIISERVATIONS   ON 


I** 

k 


letter  dated  New  York,  July  i,  1780.  "Under  these  circum 
stances,  [viz  :  the  failure  of  the  surprise  and  tiic  number  of 
British  wounded)"  says  Robertson.  "  Gf,nrral  Knypliausen  .i,wr 
;//  f/w  iiitnition  of  forcinj,'  Washington  to  an  action  in  such  an 
advantageous  post  and  resolved  to  wait  in  JersL-y  Sir. Henry 
Clinton's  arrival,  that  he  might  be  ready  to  act  jointly  or  sepa- 
rately with  him."  '  Judge  Jones'  main  point  is  thus  disposed  of 
by  the  "old  German"  himself.  It  was  not  Clintons  faidt  that  he 
was  deprived  of  the  honor  of  routing  Washington.  That  the 
British  commander  was  disappointed  at  the  situation  upon  his 
arrival  from  the  South  appears  in  one  of  his  manuscript  notes  to 
Stedman's  History.  "  This  premature  move  in  Jersey,"  he  ob- 
serves,  "at  a  time  when  S.  H.  C.  least  expected  it  prevented  a 
combined  movement  against  W.  that  might  have  been  decisive." 
In  his  published  "  Observations"  on  the  same  historian,  he 
makes  further  criticisms  as  follows  : 

"Mr.  Stedman  seems,  in  this  account,  to  have  followed  American  writers: 
had  he  inquired,  he  would  have  found  Sir  H.  Clinton  did  not  arrive  at  New  York 
till  after  this  expedition  had  taken  place;  that  Sir  H.  Clinton  knew  nothing  of  this 
anticipated  movement  (which,  as  he  had  not  the  least  reason  to  expect  it,  he  had 
not  forbid).  If  it  had  n(/t  taken  place  or  could  have  been  stopt  in  time  by  either 
of  the  officers  he  had  sent  to  prepare  for  one,  in  which  he  intended  to  have  taken 
a  part  with  the  corps  he  hpd  purposely  brought  from  Charlestown,  success  of 
some  importance  might  have  been  the  consequence;  as  it  was,  every  movement 
that  did  take  place  after  Sir  H.  Clinton's  return  to  New  York,  was  merely  to 
retire  the  corps,  (which  had  moved  into  Jersey)  without  affront."  « 

After  Knyphausen's/rrjvv,  Washington,  hearing  of  Clinton's 
arrival  from  the  South,  moved  toward  the  Hudson.  Clinton 
then  sent  Knyphausen  again  into  Jersey  to  ascertain  the 
American  situation,  and  the  unimportant  battle  of  Springfield 
was  fought  with  Greene  and  our  rear  guard  on  June  23.  The 
failure  of  this  Jerse\'  move  must  be  laid  upon  the  "  Old  Ger- 
man," Robertson  and  Tryon,  not  on  Clinton,  whose  i.itended 
plans  they  had  disarranged.  Judge  Jones,  evidently,  again  did 
not  have  facts  before  him  when  he  wrote  the  above  extract. 


'yV.'ji'  York  Coloni,  /Docs.     Vol.  VIII.  p.  793. 

'^  Ohso-'ations   on      Ir.   Stedman's  History  of  the  Aiii,r!oiit  War.     By  Lieut. 
Gen,  Clinton,  K.B.      London,  1794,     Fifty  copies  reprinted  in  New  York,  1S64. 


-r.     4-.- 


m 


JUDGE  JONES'   HISTOKV, 


65 


XIV.-CLINTOM.    ARHUTHNOT    AND   ROCHAMBEAU.  1780. 

On  page  358.  Vol.  I.,  we  have  still  another  instance  of  Clin- 
ton  s  cnm.nal  indifference  and  incapacity  as  discovered  by  ludce 
Jones:  ** 

"  In  the  summer  of  1780."  he  writes,  "a  French  fleet  under  the  command  of 
Mons.eur  De  Fernay,  with  about  4000  men  commanded  by  Monsieur  Rocham- 
beau  arnved  at,  and  with  the  cc.sent  of  Co„Kress,  took  possession  of.  Rhode 
sland  hav,„«  accdentaily  and  luckily  escaped  the  English  squadron,  then  at  sea 
under  the  command  of  A.imiral  Arbuthnot  and  in  every  point  superior  to  the 
Frenc  ,  Arbuthnot  finding  that  D.  Ternay  had  eluded  all  the  precautions  he  had 
taken  to  mtercept  h.m.  and  K„t  safe  to  Rhode   Island,  returned  to  oandv  Hook  " 

FrPn.h  fl  "  '"  f"*-!  '"  '""'  '^^  ■'^'''"''■'*'  '^"'''  ^"'  '^'^"'''^  I''''«"d.  blocked  up  the 
French  fleet  and  then  •■  sent  an  express  to  General  Clinton,  /ro^oso,^  .„.  attack 
as  -oon  aspossM-  „pon  the  French  jUct  and  arn.y,  in  Conjunction  with  the  British 
army  who  were  u,  land  and  attack  Monsieur  Rochambeau,  while  the  British  fleet 
attacked  hat  of  the  French.  Th.  French  army  were  at  this  time  but  just  arrived 
were  s.ckly.  had  erected  no  fortifications   nor  cast  up  any  works  worth  mention! 

/v       1"'","  '"  '"■^  '""■'•'''  '^"^  '^'"^  '-''°«^  "'•-■"■  ^^'i'hout  riskins  the  safety 

of  NewVork  m  the  least.  The  success  of  the  enterprise  was  undoubted.  A 
noble  achievement  it  would  have  been.  Ten  French  men-of-war.  with  an  Ad- 
miral s  flaK  either  taken  or  destn,  ;,  and  a  French  army  of  4,000  men.  with  an 
experienced  General  at  their  head,  ma.le  prisoners  of  war.  What  answer  was 
made  to  the  proposal  is  uncertain.  Exfrcss  after  Express  arrived  from  the  Admi- 
ral,  press,n^  the  matter  ,n  the  most  .n^ent  tenns,  and  e„>reatin^  the  General  to  use 
the  utmost  despatch. 

"  In  about  a  month  after  the  first  express.  Clinton  ordered  the  trans- 
ports up  the  Sound  as  far  as  Frog's  Neck,  about  ten  n-iles  distant  from  his  en- 
campment on  the  North  River.  As  soon  as  the  transports  arrived,  he  decamped 
sent  a  part  of  his  troops  to  New  York,  and  with  the  remainder  marched  to 
Thron  s  Point,  embarked,  and  sailed  up  the  Sound.  Great  things  were  now  ex- 
pected:  nothing  less  than  the  destruction  of  the  French  fleet,  and  the  capture  of 
Rochambeau  and  his  army.  But  to  the  disappointment  of  every  o-  -  with  a 
wind  as  fair  for  Rhode  Island  as  it  couia  blow,  the  whole  fleet  came  to  an  anchor 
in  HuntinKton  Hay.  about  3"  miles  to  the  eastward  of  Throg's  Point,  upon  the 
Long  Island  shore.  In  this  bay  he  continued  as  long  as  the  wind  remained  fair 
(about  a  fortnight)  for  Rhode  Island,  where  the  enemy  lay.  As  soon  as  the  wind 
dropt  about,  an<i  blew  fair  for  New  York,  the  signal  was  made,  the  anchors 
weighed,  the  sails  unfurled,  and  to  the  mortification  of  everv  loyalist  within  the 
British  lines  the  fleet  moved  to  the  westward." 

In  Other  words,  we  are  lo  understand  the  Judge  that  it  was 
Arbuthnot,  and  not  Clinton,  who  projected  this  Expedition 
against  the  French,  and  that  he  alone  was  prompt  and  efficient, 
while  the  Gen< -nl  played  the  laggard  and  caused  the  failure  of 


66 


OliSERVATIONS   ON 


li- 


the scheme.     But  what  says  Clinton  as  to  this  in  his  "Observa- 
tions" on  Stedman  ? 

"  Sir  H.  Clinton,  on  receiving  [)rivate  information  of  the  expected  arrival  of  a 
Frei  -h  armament  at  Rhode  \sVa.nd,  ptvf^cstd  lo  Adniiral Ar/uit/inot  (\\\\r-n  he  should 
be  j'jined  by  Admiral  Greaves)  that  the  French  troops  should  he  met  at  their  land- 
ing;  for  which  purpose  Sir  H.  Clinton  was  to  have  entered  and  landed  in  the 
Sect  net  Passage  vvith  6ckx)  men,  covered  by  some  frigates  ;  and  all  that  was  re- 
quested of  the  Admiral  was  to  block  with  his  large  ships  the  principal  harbor, 
until  any  success  the  troops  might  meet  vvith  should  induce  the  fleet  to  co-operate; 
but  if  the  expediiion  should  not  take  place  before  the  French  troops  have  been 
landed,  and  have  repaired  the  works  of  Newport,  and  they  should  also  have 
been  reinforced,  in  that  case  Sir  H.  Clinton  had  given  it  as  his  humble  opinion 
that  the  troops  could  not  venture  to  act,  unless  the  fleet  would  take  an  active  part 
as  well  as  the  troops." 

Not  only  did  Clinton  propo. ;  the  attempt  on  the  French, 
but  he  was  the  first  to  hear  of  their  arrival.  Writing  to  Ger- 
maine  Au!,^  14,  he  says:  "On  the  i8th  |Jul\-]  by  a  courier 
from  the  East  end  of  Long  Island,  the  first  intelligence  was  re- 
ceived of  the  arrival  of  the  French  off  Rhode  Island,  on  the 
loth,  which  /  transmitted  iniincdiatcly  to  Admiral  ArlmtJinot!' 
It  was  actually  ten  days  after  the  French  arrived  before  Arbuth- 
not  appeared  off  Newport.  Five  days  later  only — the  delay 
being  caused  by  the  non-arrival  of  transports  which  Clinton  had 
ordered  some  weeks  before — Clinton  embark,  d  from  Throg's 
Neck  under  convoy  of  two  war  vessels  frt)m  Arbuthnot's  fleet, 
Avhich  joined  him  the  day  of  his  start,  and  proceeded  to  Hunt- 
ington I^ay.  There,  he  reports,  "  /  tvas  /loiiored  wit/i  siie/i  ae- 
coHHts  from  the  Admiral,  of  the  attention  the  enemy  had  i^iven  to 
fortify  themselves,  ih-di  I  no  longer  entertained  an  idea  of  making 
any  attempt  solely  with  the  troops."  ' 

In  his  own  report  to  the  Admiralty  office,  dated  August  9, 
1780,  Arbuthnot  makes  no  mention  of  any  proposal  on  his  part 
for  a  combined  att.ick  on  the  French,  as  Judge  Jones  as  erts, 
nor  th.it  he  repeatedly  m-ged  Clinton  to  join  him  with  land 
forces.  He  tlid  no  more,  after  sailing  around  to  Newport,  than 
to  report  the  situation  to  Clinton  and  leave  the  matter  of  his 
moving  on  with  troops  to  the  General's  judgment.  The  Ad- 
miral's   own    words    are    C(.inclusive :     "In    tin:    meantime,"  he 


'  See  both  Clinton's  and  .Arljuthnot's  letters  in  Almon's  Remembrancer,  Vol.  X. 
pp.  260,  264. 


;J 


..^:----m: 


JUDGE   JONES'    HISTORY. 


'^      !852.      ?  > 


67 


writes,  "the  Blonde  and  Galatea  were  left  with  orders  to  bring 
the  transports  under  their  convoy  from  New  York  s/nwM  the 
Gcncnxl  judge  an  attempt  on  Rhode  Island  to  be  7,'ar  ran  tabic" 
What,  then,  becomes  of  the  Jud<rc's  assertions  that  Arbuthnot 
was  the  man  of  the  occasion,  that  Clinton  delayed  a  month, 
that  "express  after  express"  was  sent  to  him,  and  other  mis- 
representations to  the  same  effect?  What  the  Judge  says 
further  in  regard  to  the  (ienera!  and  Admiral  is  c(|ually  suscep- 
tible of  disproof. 


XV.-ADMIR.\L  FARKER,  CLINTON'  AND  FORT  MOULTRIE,    1776. 

Still  another  thrust  at  Clinton  is  made  by  the  Judge  in  his 
account  of  the  British  attack  on  Fort  Moultrie,  Charleston  har- 
bor, in  June.  1776.  The  lack  of  co-operatio"  between  the 
enemy's  lar.d  and  naval  forces  on  that  occasion  has  never  been 
explained  to  entire  satisfaction  either  by  English  or  American 
historians  probably  because  Clinton'.s  own  explanation  in  his 
"Observations"  on  Stixlman  had  no't  been  brought  to  their 
notice.  As  Judge  Jones  had  not  seen  these  "Observations."  his 
own  errors  can  be  accounted  for;  but  his  treatment  of  the  sub- 
ject, nevertheless,  is  to  be  referretl  to  as  illustrating  again  with 
what  alacrity  he  seized  and  recorded  mere  hearsaj-.  ruxnor  or 
plausible  theory,  if  it  furnished  him  ;ui  opportunity  of  ti-rningit 
into  a  shaft  at  his  euL-mies.  His  reference  to  the  affair  is  as 
follows  : 

(Vol.  I,  p.  ()(,):  "  During'  this  lont;  and  heavy  cannonade  [by  Admiral  Parker's 
ships]  the  army.  accordinR  to  its  projected  plan,  never  made  its  appearance,  nor  did 
the  Commander  ever  send  word  to  the  Admiral  of  his  reasons  for  not  co-operating 
with  the  ticet,  thediltii  ulties  in  its  way,  and  its  utterinipracticabil..y.  This  was  inex- 
cusable at  least.  The  reason  it  seems  was  this:  When  thearmy  marched,  in  order 
to  carry  their  part  of  the  i)lan  into  execution,  they  found  the  creek  which  divided 
the  island  instead  of  being  knee  deep  to  be  not  less  than  seven  feet,  and  as  they 
had  neither  boats  nor  bridge,  the  passage  was  impossible.  This  is  the  only  rea- 
son that  has  been  hitherto  given  ;md  a  siipprising  one  it  is.  That  a  General  should 
be  nineteen  days  upon  an  isl.ind,  was  to  carry  on  an  attack  upon  another  island 
adjacent,  knew  there  was  a  creek  to  pass,  and  yd  in  all  thai  time  /niJ  n.-T.-r  ,lis 
coViird,  01-  cmlfax'ound  to  disarvcr  its  d,-pth  ,'f  1,'ati'r !  This  occasioned  the  failaie 
of  the  attack,  and  of  course  all  prospect  of  success  in  the  Southern  Colonies  at 
that  time.     Was  there  ever  a  more  stupid  piece  of  business,  except  indeed   when 


J!' 


68 


OBSERVATIONS   ON 


i|; 


!f:f 


the  Ministry,  after  this,  intrusted  this  man  with  the  supreme  command  in  North 
America,  and  the  numberless  stupid  acts  he  did  in  that  command  ?" 

In  his  unpublished  manuscript  "  Notes"  on  Stedman,'  CHnton 
disposes  of  the  Judge's  version  by  stating  that  the  depth  of  the 
water  had  been  ascertained  and  report  duly  sent  to  Parker  five 
days  after  the  landing  of  the  troops,  or  some  twelve  days  before 
the  attack  was  made. 

"  General  Vaughan,"  continues  Clinton,  "  who  went  to  make  this  report  to  the 
Commodore,  informed  him  at  the  same  time,  the  troops  could  not  act  on  that 
side,  but  offered  him  two  Battalions  to  embark  on  board  the  fleet.  Had  this  offer 
been  accepted,  the  Commodore  would  have  had  sufficient  force  to  take  and  keep 
possession  of  the  fort,  //  jV  /kk/  <•-■<■;•  />,rn  evacuated.  The  short  fact  is,  the  Com- 
modore expected  to  succeed  without  the  army;  and  perhaps,  if  he  had  placed  his 
ships  as  near  as  he  might  have  done,  he  would  have  succeeded;  but  at  8(X)  yards 
distance,  it  was  merely  a  Cannonade.  The  army  could  do  nothing.  Gen.  Clinton 
received  the  King's  approbation  of  his  conduct.  Had  his  letter  been  published,  as 
well  as  that  of  the  Commodore,  no  blame  could  have  been  imputed  to  the  army. 
Certain  queries  of  Gen.  Clinton  to  Sir  P.  Parker,  on  reading  his  letter,  and  Sir  P. 
Parker's  answers,  explain  this  whole  business  clearly.  Perhaps  the  public  may 
one  day  see  them." 

The  "  public"  did  sec  these  queries  and  answers  soon  after, 
as  Clinton  published  them  in  his  "  Ob.servations."  In  his  pre- 
liminary explanation  the  General  says : 

'•  It  had  been  ////,?//)■  settled  by  Commodore  Sir  P.  Parker  and  General  Clinton, 
that  part  of  the  troops  (there  were  boats  for)  A-ere  to  have  landed  not  on  Sullivan's 
IsK..id,  as  Mr.  Stedman  says,  but  on  the  main  land,  proceeding  to  it  by  creeks 
communicating  with  it;  three  of  the  frigates  were  to  have  co-operated  with  the 
troops  in  an  intended  attack  u|)on  Hedrall's  Point,  where  the  enemy  had  a  work 
covering  their  bridi;e  ol  cornm  jnication  with  Sullivan's  Island;  the  three  frigates 
intended  for  co-operation  with  the  troops,  almost  immediately  run  aground:  in  the 
hope  thay  would  soon  float  and  proceed,  \.\\m  troops  embarked  on  the  2Sth,  and 
finding  the  frigates  did  not  proceed,  the  troops  of  course  di.-iembaik.;-',  the  same 
on  the  29th,  and  as  the  frigates  did  lot  proceed,  the  troo;is  could  not." 

I  he  queries  aiui  answers  are  given  as  fijllows: 

<.hi:rk  iiKsr  i-kmm  c;e\.  i  1  im(in   m  sir  v.   I'akkkr. 

"  Dill  I  not,  very  early  after  I  had  landed  on  Long  Island,  inform  you,  it  was 
discovered  that  there  was  no  fonl  at  low  water  between  Long  Island  and  Suli- 
van  s  Island  ;  and  that  I  feared  the  troops  could  not  co-operate  in  the  manner  we 
at  first  intended  thev  should  ':" 


ill 


'  In  the  Carter  Blown  library,  Providencj,  R.  L     The  extract  here  quoted  is 
from  S[)arks'  transcript  of  the  "  Notes  "  in  the  Library  of  Harvard  College. 


9k^im*^.,l0kr,,..    .*«.. 


JUDGE  JONES'   IIISTORV, 


69 


SIR    P.    I'ARKER's   answer    to   sir    H.    CLINTON. 

"You  certainly  made   known  your  difficulties,  and  in  your  letter  of  the  iSth 
June,  you  say.  •  there  is  no  ford,  an.i  that  the  Generals  concur    dwl^of' 

z:::,::z^::t  --"^  --  -^^  -^  -- . ...  mended  .t;::  z :. 

QUERE   SECOND    FR,.M    GENERAL   CLINTON    TO    SIR    V.    PARKER. 

V.Z^"^l  ""'  °'^''  '''"  battalions  to  embark  on   board  the  fleet,  and  General 

ix:  ;:;:;:ir  r ''--'  ^^^-^  ^-^  --  ->■  -■'-  -  ^^^^^^  -^^  -^^^ 

ANSWER. 

"Some  conversation  passed  between  General  Vaughan  and  mvself  about 
troops,  but  I  dui  not  think  it  material;  and  I  was  so  extremely  ill  on  mv  bed  du/ 
.ng  the  ume  that  I  could  not  attend  to  it,  and  am  therefore,  obliged  T-'fer  you 
to  General  Vaughan  for  the  particulars."  Kuiwieryou 

QUERE    THIRD    FROM    GENERAL  CLINTON   TO    SIR    v.    PARKER. 

their  ^f  \"'r  """^T'  '^^'  '^'  ''"■""  ^''^^'''  '"■'8'^'  co-operate  with  the  troops  on 
their  intended  attack  on  the  post  of  Hedrall's  Point  ?" 


ANSWER. 

•'The  three  frigates,  besides  performing  the  services  mentioned  in  my  public 
letter  were  intended  to  co-operate  with  you." 

QI-ERE    K.>1:rt1I    FROM    GENERAL   CLINTON    TO    SIR    r.    I'ARKER. 

"  If  the  forts  were  silenced  and  evacuated  for  an  hour  and  a  half  was  it  the 
tmops  that  were  hrst  to  take  possession  (as  Sir  P.  Parker's  letter  mav  seem  to 
■mply  or  the  sailors  and  marines,  which  Sir  P.  Parker  informed  Sir  H  Cl^ton 
n  his  letter  of  the  35.h  June,  /.  had  practised  for  that  purpose,  that  were  fi  It  to 
land  and  take  possession  ?  vcic  iirsi,  10 

ANSWER. 

"I  certainly  did  intend,   as  appears  by  my  letter  of  25th  June    to  have  af 
empted  taking  possession  of  the   fort  with  the  sailors  and  mirin  s  fir  t   bu    ! 
could  not  have  planned  the  doing  of  it  with  about  300  men,  without  the  p  i.speu 
of  speecly  support  from  you;  and  I  saw,  soon  after  the  attack  begun    from  '  v-a 
nety  of  circumstances,  you  could  take  no  effectual  steps  for  that  purple 

Sir  H.  Clinton  is  persuaded  there  needs  no  comment  on  the  above  if  he 
should  make  any,  it  would  be  the  two  following  short  ones- 

First,  H,-.d  ,he  frigates  been  able  to  proceed  to  their  stations,  an  ai.empt  (pos- 
sibly a  successful  one,  migh,  ha^e  been  made  on  the  post  of  Hedrall's  Point 

Secondly.  If  Commodore  Sir  P.  Parker  ha.l  accepted  the  General's  offer  of 
two  battalions  t..  embark  on  board  the  lleet.  he  would  have  had  a  suffic  ent   orce 


70 


OI!SEk\  ATIOXS    ()\ 


to  take  and  keep  possession   of   the  fort   on   Sulivan's    Island,  liaJ  tliat  fort  ever 
been  silenced  or  e7(ieiiii/ei/.' 

In  justice  to  Sir  Henry  Clinton,  these  explanations,  giving 
his  side  of  the  story,  should  be  made  a  more  familiar  matter  of 
histor\-.  They  appear  to  have  proved  an  effectual  answer  to 
Stedman  in  17^4.  and  as  satisfactorily  answer  Judoe  Jones 
to-daw 


XVI. -FORTIFICATION'S  OF  NEW  YORK,   1776-1783. 

Amoni;-  the  various  points  of  local  interest  upon  which  the 
Judge  touches  is  the  number  of  times  New  \'ork  Cit\-  was  forti- 
fied durini;  the  ])roL(re.',s  of  the  war.  The  editor  of  the  work 
states  in  the  preface,  upon  the  authoritj-  of  the  Judge,  that 
"the  forti;' rations  of  New  York  were  removed  two  or  three 
times."  The  first  tlefences  were  those  constructed  by  the 
Americans  in  the  spring  and  summer  of  1776.  What  became 
of  them  after  the  city  fell  into  the  po.ssession  of  the  enemy  is 
thus  described  by  th-    Judge  in  Vol.  I.  p.  347: 

"  The  General  [Howe]  by  the  advice  of  the  principal  enifineer,  his  confidential 
friend  [Captain  Montressor],  ordered  all  these  forts,  batteries,  and  redoubts,  with 
two  or  three  exceptions,  with  the  barricadoes  erected  by  the  rebels,  to  he  demol- 
ished, and  the  lines  and  entrenchments  filled  up  and  levelled.  The  performance 
of  this  business  was  committed  to  the  care  and  direction  of  the  aforesaid  engineer, 
and  to  pull  down  what  the  rebels  had  erected  at  no  e.spense,  cost  John  Hull  more 
than  /,"i5o,oaj  sterling,  /"loo.ooo  of  which,  the  confidential  friend  put  into  his 
own  pocket,  returned  to  England,  purchased  one  of  the  Ktnleelest  houses  in 
Portland  Place,  a  n(jble  country-seat  in  Surrey,  set  up  his  carriages,  had  a  house 
full  of  servants  in  rich  livery,  and  lived  in  all  the  splendor  of  an  Eastern  prince. 
■  •  •  •  In  1780  it  was  thought  necessary  inobody,  the  (ienerals  excepted, 
knew  for  what)  to  rebuild  all  the  demolished  forts  that  had  been  built  by  the  reliels 
upon  Xew  York  Island,  and  to  add  a  number  of  new  ones.  This  was  done,  the 
work  wasperformeil,  that  is  the  labouring  jwrt,  by  the  inhabitants  of  Xew  York. 
The  Cieneral  also  thought  it  necessary  (for  his  own  safety  no  doubt,  as  no  one 
else  apprehended  any  danger)  to  h.ive  beacons  erected  all  round  the  island,  a  cir- 
cumference <jf  at  least  30  miles,  and  upon  every  hill,  mount,  (jr  eminence,  upon 
the  island.      Not  less  than  300  of  the  beacons  were  erected,  with  a  tar  barrel  up..n, 

'  Italics,  Clinton's.  Commodore  Parker  reporte.i  thai  .luring  the  progress  of 
the  bombardment  the  Americans  evacuated  the  fort  and  left  it  unmanned  for  an 
hour  and  a  half,  which  was  not  the  case,  however. 


JUrxiE   JONKS'    HISTORV. 


land  i„  possession  of  his  plum/  '■■''  "'^""^"''  •"^'''""^''^  '"  E"«- 

Add  to  these  figures  ^loo.oooallc-ed  to  have  been  expended 
upon  works  erected  in  Brooklyn  in  , ;;,,  and  ^300,000  in'  ,  ;S^- 
82,  and  we  have  the  sum  of  over  £'700.000  chvnvn  fro.n  the 
treasury  of  (.reat  Britain  to  pay  for  putting-  up  and  pullin<r 
down  defences  around  New  York  during  thenar.  The  Judge 
may  be  correct.  He  makes  l,is  statements  with  the  positiveness 
of  a  wnter  who  lias  the  treasury  accounts   before  iiim.     Certain 

but  H?  1  T''"'  'T''"  ^•■^'P'-''"''^^'""-""^  ---^Pecting  the  figures 
but  the  defences.  Is  it  a  fact,  for  ins-xnce.  that  the  New  York 
works  of  ,;76r.m-  destroyed  by  the  British,  as  the  Judge  as- 
serts .  The  force  of  his  statements  depends  on  this,  for  if  there 
was  no  tearmg  down  there  could  have  been  little  rebuilding 
and  few  "plums"  for  engineers.  Eye-witnesses  leave  a  brief 
record  „.  the  case.  The  English  traveller  Smythe.  afterwards 
an  officer  ,n  the  service,  reached  New  York  on  March  18,  1777. 
I  imnu.d,ately.     he  writes,  -  visited  all  the  posts  in  the  vicin- 

/L     A"'/     r    T"^'''^'  ^^'  *'^'"  ^'■'■^'■^h  troops,  and  viewed 
^    ,../nn./r  of:.orks  all  over  tkc  island  tknn.n  up  by  tkc  nMs, 

vh.ch   w,ll   remam  lasting  monuments  of  American   follv  and 
fearfulness.       -7  o    describe."  he    says  elsewhere.    -  the  works 
thrown  up  by  the  Americans    upon   this  island   would   take  up 
more  room  than  this  volume  can  afford,  or  the  subject  deserves 
as  they  actually  cover  the  whole  island.     Two  only  I  shall  take 
notice  of.  VIZ..  a  strong  work  on   an  eminence,  just  at  the  en- 
trance into  the  town  from  the  land  which  is  named  Bunker  Hill 
and  the  other  is    lH,rt   Washington,  &c."     It  seems  from  this 
that  SIX    months    after   the    British    occupation,  the  American 
works   were   .still   standing.     II„w  was  it    nearly  a  year  after? 
Another  English  subject.  Mr.  Thomas   Eddis.'  lately  a  civil  offi- 
cer  of  the  Crown  in  Maryland,  wrote  from  New  York  on  August 
16,    1777:     "The    numerous    fortifications    thrown    up    by  ^he 
American    troops  in  the    vicinity  of  the   Capital,  appear  to  be 
constructed  with  judgment  and   attention.     Why  they  were  so 
precipitately  abandoned  is  difficult  to  ascertain  :  iiKhrd  the  whole 


^  Utters  from  Amcriat,  Thos.  Edilis,  p.  429. 


7^ 


OBSERVATIONS   ON 


island  forms  a  continued  chain  of  batteries  and  intrenchmcnts 
which  seemed  to  indicate  the  most  resolute  opposition."  Smythe 
and  Eddis  not  only  examined  the  works  in  person  but  were 
impressed  with  their  great  extent :  and  when  Eddis  wrote,  Sir 
William  Howe  and  Jtis  engineer  Montressor  ivcre  in  Pennsylvania, 
tv/iere  they  remained  until  superseded.  How  much  credit,  t)ien, 
is  to  be  given  to  Judge  Jones  when  he  tells  us  that  all  these 
works  were  levelled,  and  that  too  under  the  "  care"  and  "direc- 
tion" oi"  Montressor;  and  what  becomes  of  the  /"loo.ooo  he 
pocketed  for  levelling  what  clearly  never  was  levelled  during 
his  stay  in  New  York  ?  ' 

References  to  the  defences  in  the  later  years  of  the  war, 
though  meagre,  sustain  the  Judge  but  little  better.  In  1779, 
when  Sir  Henry  Clinton  was  preparing  for  his  expedition  against 
Charleston,  South  Carolina,  he  proposed  to  leave  New  York  safe 
-igainst  the  attack  of  the  expected  French  fleet  and  forces.  To 
Lord  Germain  he  wrote  August  21  :  "I  am  therefore  employing 
the  army  to  perfect  the  defences  of  this  post,  which  at  all  events 
must  be  left  out  of  reach  of  any  insult."  But  according  to  the 
Judge  there  were,  at  that  date,  no  defences  to  "  perfect."  Lieut. 
Auburey  wrote  from  New  York,  October  30,  1781,  that  the 
American  works  "  are  not  only  on  grounds  and  situations  that 
are  extremely  advantageous  and  commanding,  but  works  of  great 
strength;"  and  in  the"  Political  Magazine"  for  November,  178 1, 
there  is  a  description  of  the  city  given  in  which  the  writer  says, 
that  "Just  without  New  York  the  Rebel  redoubts  and  lines  that 
stretched  from  the  East  to  the  North  River  still  remain,  but 
they  are  greatly  decayed."  The  f^nal  and  corroborative,  or  more 
properly,  the  best  evidence  in  the  case,  however,  is  that  furnished 
by  the  onl\'  known  original  map  of  New  York  City  which  shows 
the  defences  erected  by  both  sides  during  the  Revolution, 
namely,  the  map  of  the  Engineer  Hills,  surveyed  in  1782  and 
drawn  in  1785,  deposited  in  the  map  room  in  the  City  Hall.  In 
the  right  hand  corner,  Hills  entered  three  important  explanatory 


'  It  is  true  that  the  Brooklyn  work:.  v\cre  demolished  bv  Howe's  orders,  but  they 
were  but  a  small  part  of  the  whole,  and  the  proof  is  yet  to  be  produced  that  Mon- 
tressor advised  their  demolition  or  pocketed  any  "  plums."  It  would  be  interest- 
ing also  to  have  something  further  ai.out  the  yx)  beacons  around  \ew  York  Island, 
and  the  nightly  detail  of  guards,  involving  at  least  iyn  men,  to  light  them  ' 


JUDGE   JONES'    HISTORV 


71 


memoranda   as    follows:     "A!    the  works  colored  Yellow  wc.o 
erected  by  the  Forces  of  the  United  States  in  r776.-Those  works 
colored  Orange  were  erected  by  Do  and  repaired  by  the  British 
forces.— Those  works  colored  Green  were  erected  by  the  British 
l^orces  during  the  war."     According  to  this,  if  Judge  Jones   be 
correct,  there  should  be  at  least  one  if  not  two  distinct  green- 
colored    hnes  of  works,  protecting  New  York,  on   Hill's   map 
1  he)  may  be  searched  for  in  vain.     The  American  line  is  there 
with  only  such  alterations  and  additions   as  the  more   skilful 
British  engineers  may  have  suggested  or  the  varying  exigencies 
of  the  situation  during  the  long  war  required.     Neither  this  map 
nor  the  contemporary  writers  quoted,  give  the  least  countenance 
to   the   sweeping   assertions    made    by   the   Judge.     Curiously 
enough  the  original  American  circular  redoubt  on  the  hill  on  the 
Judge's  cnvncrrounds  east  of  the  Bowery  remains  on   Hills'  map 
still  the  sar    ,  American  yellow-colored  circular  redoubt  (possibly 
repaired),  and  not  a  twice-rebuilt  British  battery,  standing,  as  a 
disgrace  to  peculating  engineers  I '  ^^ 


t\ 


XVII.-THE  CASE  OF  GENERAL  WOODHULL. 

The  facts  that  General  Nathaniel  Woodhull,  of  Mastick.  L  I. 
was  President  of  the  New  York  Convention  when  hostilities 
opened— that  he  was  in  command  of  the  Long  Island  militia  at 
the  time  of  the  Battle  of  Long  Island  on  August  2;th.  1776— 
that  he  was  made   prisoner  on  the  following  evening— that  he 

•  The  editor  of  Jones"  work  states  in  the  preface  that  the  last  works  erected  by 
Chnton  "  are  those  shown  on  the  only  .nap  of  the  fortifications  of  New  York  in 
existence,  that  made  by  Hill  in  1782.  which  are  unfortunately  often  but  erroneously 
supposed  to  be  the  American  works  of  1776.  and  have  ,■-■,;/  hcnt  nproduced  as  such 
very  nrenlh:  Th.s  criticism  could  hardly  have  been  made  after  an  inspection  of 
the  ongmal  Hills  in  the  City  Hall.  Under  which  description  will  Clinton's  "  last- 
works  c.me.-yellow.  orange  or  green  ?  Nor  is  it  stated  what  the  erroneous  map 
IS  that  has  been  "  recently"  issued.  The  present  writer  perhaps  may  be  permitted 
to  say  that,  as  to  this,  the  most  recently  published  map  representing  the  defences 
of  New  York,  so  far  as  he  is  aware,  is  that  accompanving  \'„|.  HI  of  the  Long 
Island  Historical  Society  Series,  which  was  compiled  with  care  from  the  original 
Hills  and  followed  the  "yell.nv"  line  in  locating  the  American  works.  This 
explanation  appears  in  Fart  L  of  that  work,  p.  84,  n. 


74 


(>HSEK\  ATInXS   ().\ 


received  tlan<,aToiis  wounds  at  the  time  of  his  capture  fnmi  the 
effects  of  which  he  died  on  September  20th— ant!  tiiat  some  un- 
certainty and  mystery  attaches  to  the  circumstances  under 
which  the  wounds  were  inflicted,  have  excited  the  special 
interest  of  a  number  of  historical  Avriters,  and  provoked  a  dis- 
cussion  amon<j  them. 

The  point  of  controversy  in  the  case,  until  Judj^e  Jones' 
version  appeared,  related  to  the  responsibility  of  one  of  the 
officers  of  the  detachment  which  captured  the  General— the 
officer  in  question  beinj;  Captain  Oliver  de  Lancey.  who  was 
related  to  the  Judijc  by  marria<;e.  It  has  been  charj^^ed  on  one 
side  tliat  he  struck  W'oodhull  immediately  after  his  surrender 
without  sufficient  provocation,  and  that  his  men  thereafter  con- 
tinned  to  cruelly  hack  him  about  tiie  head  and  arm.  On  the 
other  side  it  is  made  to  appear  that,  if  Captain  de  Lancey  took 
any  part  in  the  occurrence,  it  was  to  interfere  and  protect  the 
General  from  further  mutilation  by  the  soldiers.  The  discussion 
was  carried  on  by  published  correspondence  in  ICS48  principally 
by  J.  Fennimore  Cooper.  Henry  C.  \'an  Schaack.  Lorenzo 
Sabine,  and  Henry  Onderdonk,  Jr. 

Judn^e  Jones'  narrative,  however,  puts  the  case  on  a  new  foot- 
ing  by  alle<,nn<,^  that  General  Woodhull  received  his  wounds 
x^'hilc  nidcavoriii}^  to  make  his  escape  subsequent  to  his  surrender, 
in  which  case  the  wounds  were  justifiably  inflicted  by  the  soldier 
on  guard.  This  view  of  the  case  was  substantially  endorsetl  by 
Fennimore  Cooper,  who  (juoted  from  the  Judge's  manuscript 
during  the  discussion  referred  to.  and  wiio.  being,  like  the  Judge, 
also  related  to  the  de  Lancey  famil\-,  naturally  defended  Captain 
de  Lancey  from  the  charge  of  cruclt\-  in  the  W'oodhull  affair. 
Judge  Jones  \^  furthermore  endorsed  by  the  editor  of  his  work, 
who  claims  that  his  account  "  has  an  authenticity  that  no  other 
of  the  various  versions  of  this  occurrence  can  possibly  possess." 
The  whole  matter  thus  turns  upon  the  value  of  the  Judge's 
testimony,  and  in  this  light  only  is  it  referred  to  here.  Does 
Judge  Jones  scttU  the  disputed  iioint  as  the  authority  in  the 
case  ? 

It  is  claimed  for  the  Judge  that  he  was  connected  with  the 
families  of  Captain  de  Lancey  and  General  Woodhull.  that  he 
was  personally  acquainted   with   both,  that   he  lived  on   Long 


JUlXiF.   JONES'    HISTOR 


Island  not  many  miles  from  tli 
that  he  had  ample  opportiinitv  to  I 


c  scene  of  Woodli 


ppi 
capture,  and  could  not  be  mistak 
seen,"  saj's  Mr.  Cooper  i 


nil's  capture, 


learn   the  particulars  of  the 


en  in  his  account.     "  It  will  bt 

n  one  of  his  letters  in  the  controversy 

ion,  residence,  and  social  position,  the  histo- 


was  next  to 
lie  story  and  its  con- 


11  m  a  written 


that  from  connect 
nan  |  Jones  |  was  every  way  fitted  for  his  task.      It 
impossible  that  he  .should  not  have  heard  tl 

tradiction,  and  that  undertakinir  to  leave  behind  1     _    „ 

account  of  the  occurrences,  he  should  have  not  used  the  means 
he  possessed  to  learn  the  truth." 

If  this  method  of  deduction,  that  because  Judge  Jones  was 
VI  tin-  icay  of  knowing,  he,  therefore,  must  have  known  the  truth 
m  the  case,  is  to  be  accepted,  the  door  is  opened  for  the  intro- 
duction of  an    indefinite  number  of  doubts  and  ciueries.      The 
Judge  was  a  prisoner  in   Connecticut  at  the  time  of  Woodhull's 
capture,  and  did  not  return  to  his  home  until  more  than  three 
months  after  the  event.     There  is  no  evidence  that  any  story 
was  current  at  that  time  within  the  enemy's  lines  that  Captain 
de  Lancey  was  concerned  in  the  General's  death,  and  there  was 
no  necessity  for  its  contradiction.     If  he  was  concerned  in  it,  we 
cannot  suppose  that  he  would  allow  any  such  report  to  circulate, 
or  that  his  friends  would  believe  it.     If  the  Judge,  then,  wrote 
his  account  without  ever  having  heard  of  the  charge  against  the 
Captain,  he  could  have  recorded  only  what  he  heard  from  others, 
the  friends  of  the  Captain,  which  in  any  view  would  have  been 
favorable  to  the  Captain.     On   the  other   hand,  had  the  Judge 
heard  of  the  charge,  as  Mr.  Cooper  believed  "it  was  ne.vt  to  im- 
possible" that  he  should  not  have  heard  of  it,  and  at  the  same 
time  knew  that  it  was  false,  can  there  be  any  doubt  but  that  he 
would  have  seized  the  opportunity  to  denounce  the  story  as  a 
scandalous   "  rebel "    falsehood,   and    brought    forward    all    the 
proofs   in    substantiation    of    his    own    version?      But   he   does 
nothing  of  the  sort,  and  we  are  left  to  infer  that  he  recorded,  as 
he  does  in  so  many  other  cases,  simply  what  he  had  heard  from 
others,  w  hich  may  have   been   the   most  acceptable   of  one   of 
several  current  accounts. 

But   in   addition,  the   elements  of   improbability  are  to  be 
found  in  the  Judge's  version   itself.      His  wt)rds  are  (Vol.  II.  p 
332): 


\\ 


76 


oilSEkVATIONS   ON 


W' 


It  may,  from  this  state  r.f  the  cas»,  be  naturally  asked,  how  the  General  came 
to  be  so  desperately  w.,unded  as  to  die  of  those  wounds  a  few  days  afterwards? 

Ihe  lull  ,s  shortly  this.  The  General,  after  his  surrender,  favored  by  the  dark- 
Ti-.-s  r.f  the  n.Kht,  attempted  to  make  his  escape,  but  l.cinR  discovered  by  the 
sentries  whde  attempting  to  ^et  over  a  board  fence,  he  received  several  strokes 

rom  the.r  broad  swords,  particularly  one  upon  the  arm.  He  was  carried  on 
board  a  Man-of-War  and  treated  with  hospitality.  The  Surgeons  a.lvise.l  amputc^- 
tion.  To  this  he  woul.l  not  consent.  The  wound  mortified  and  he  died  in  a  few 
■days. 

It  is  to  be  noticed  that  in  this  account  we  hear  for  the  first 
time  that  Woodhuil  did  not   receive  his  wounds  in  connection 
with  hi.s  capture.     The  Jud-e  inchide.s  two  distinct  aci.s   in  the 
occurrence ;  /r.y/— the  General  was  taken  prisoner  and  guarded 
by  sentries ;  .sr/w/</— subsequently  he  attempted  to  escape  but 
failed  and  was  wounded  in  the  attempt.     Now  this  version  con- 
flicts with  what  the  editor  of  the  work  describes  as  '•  the  only  two 
sworn  accounts  of  the  incidents  of  the  Capture  that  exist."     The 
first  account  comes  through  one  William  Warne  who  testifies 
that  he  was  on  Long  Island  after  the  Jiattle  and  that,  among 
other  pieces  of  information  he  had.  "  one  of  the  light  horsemen 
told  //,•  had  taken  Gen.   Woodhuil  in  the  dark  in  a  barn;  that 
before  he  would  answer  when  he  spoke  to  the  General,  he  had 
cut  him  on  the  head  and  both  arm.s."     The  second  comes  from 
Lieut.  Robert  Troup  who  made  affidavit  for  the  information  of 
the  New  York  Committee  of  Safet>  ,  that  he  saw  General  Wood- 
hull  after  his  capture  and  was  told  by  him  that  he  was  struck  by 
his  captors  immediately  after  delivering  up  his  sword.     The.se 
two  sworn   Statements  agree  at  least  on  the  point  that  the  Gen- 
eral  was  wounded  at  the  time  he  i,as  taken-WvAl  he  was  not  com- 
pletely  in  the  hands  of  the  enemy  until  after  he  had  been  hacked 
and  bruised  ;  and  this  is  the  account  given  bv  the  Long  Island 
writers.  Messrs.  Wood.  Onderdonk  and  Thomp.son  (the  latter  a 
blood-relative   of  Woodhuil),  who   took   pains  to   examine   the 
subject.'     There  is  not  anywhere,  until  Judge  Jones'  publication 
appeared,  the  slightest  hint  given  that  Woodhuil  endeavored  to 
escape,     buch  an   attemjit  would  assuredly  have    been  noised 
about  by  the  enemy  in  self-justification. 
^     To   accept  the   Judge's  account,  we  are  thus  compelled  to 

'  It  should  be  stated  that  .Mr.  Onderdonk  also  makes  this  point  that  Wo'odhuU 
was  clearly  captured  and  wounded  at  the  same  time. 


Jlfnr.E   JONES'    HISTokV. 


77 


n^^y  make  the  capture  and  vvoundinj,^  of  General  Woodhull  co- 
r.r  ./"'''  '  ""'  ''^'^^^^"nxinyin^.  the  other.  Jud^^e  Jones 
makes  tl^-m  separate  acts,  and  by  this  means  would  have  VVood- 
1  uU  become  responsible  himself  for  the  injuries  he  received  All 
the  accounts  at  best  are  second-hand  accounts,  hut  of  the  earlier 
ones  ,t  ,s  to  be  noted  that  Warne  received  his  version  from  a 
parfc.pator  ,n  the  capture  and  Troup  >.;«  General  WooMl 
Jinnscll.  Up.,n  all  prmciples  of  evidence  the  affidavits  of  VVarne 
and  Troup  are  entitled  to  more  credit  than  the  unsupported 
statement  of  Jud^^e  Jones  who  does  not  inform  us  upon  what 
au.hontv  ..e  wrote,  and  who  wrote  as  one  in  the  de  Lancey  in- 

he  Woodhull  mystery?  Is  his  account  f^nal  and  authorita 
tive.  Is  there  not  good  ground  for  the  answer  that  the  case 
remams  where  it  was.  with  the  weight  of  probability  in  favor 
of  the  oynal  accounts,  which  represent  tliat  the  General  was 
wounded  af  the  time  of  his  capture,  and  that  he  made  no  at- 
tempt to  escape  ? ' 


XVIII.-WASHINGTON  AND  CAPTAIN  ASGILL. 

The  last  of  the  Judge's  statements  which   it  is  proposed  to 
notice  in   these   pages  is   the    only  remaining  charge  which  he 


brim 


:s    against 


the    American    Commander-in-Chief- 


-the  other 


three  havmg  been  reviewed  in  Cases  II.  and  Y.  ui  the  present 
nistance  we  have  an  account  of  the  treatment  which  the  15ritish 
Captam  Asgill  is  alleged  to  have  received  from  Washington  in 


Mr.  Cooper  endeavored   to   explain    away  or  break  down   Troup's   affidavit 
when  he  found  it  contradicting  his  own  and  the  Judges  theories  of  the  affair    The 
ed.toi  of  the  work  appears  to  commit  himself  no  further  than  to  state  that  Troup 
was       certamly  wrong"  i„  saying  that  VVoodlmll  perished,  as  he  was   informed 
through  want  of  "care  and  necessaries,"  Judge  Hobarfs  letter  of  Oct.    7    1776 
bemg  gu  en  as  proof  that  Woodhull's  wife  was    present  ,ak,n,  ,:,>;■  ,.f  ,um\,   the 
■me  of  h.s  death.     Hut  Hubarfs  wonls  scarcely  admit  of  such  a  free  interpretation 
for  he  say.  s.gn.hcan.ly,  that  the  General  '■  was  attended  /;,  his  Jyi„,r  ,„„nuntshy 
h.s  lady,    .  learly  implying  that  she  arrived  too  late  to  be  of  service,  and  was  with 
himonlyat  his  death-b.-'.     Hobarfs  and   Troup's  statements  are  easily  recon- 
cdable  with  each  other.  ^ 


78 


t>l!SEk\  ATIoN'S    (»N 


1782  and  wliich  the  Jucl-c  denounces  in  unnieasured  terms. 
Ihc  Chief,  indeed,  is  lield  u,,  i„  the  li-ht  of  an  uncivilized 
monster. 

_    As  a  full  review  of  tlie  case  would  re.|uire  manv  pa-es,  atten- 
tion  IS  conMned   here  to  the  most  dama^in-  p.irt  of  the  chart;e 
which   reflects  on  Washington's  humanity.     To  state  the  point 
bnefly.  Captain    Charles  As^,,nH.  of  the  British   Guards.  Uumi  on,> 
of  the  prisoners  in  our  hands,  was  designated  bv  lot.  as  a  victim 
for  retaliation,  to  atone  for  the  murder,  by  the  enemy,  of  an 
American  Captain,  named  Joshua  Huddy.  of  .Monmouth.  New 
Jersey.     In  the  eyes  of  Washington  and  all  his  principal  ofiRcers 
the  peculuu-ly  a--ravating  circumstances  attendin-  the  death  of 
Huddy  justified  this  extreme  method  of  obtainin- satisfaction 
especially  as  the    British    refused  to  punish    the   -uilty   parties 
within  their  own  lines.     Washington  characterized  Iluddy's  fate 
as  "a  crime   of  the  blackest  dye,   not   to  be  justified   by  the 
practices  of  war  and    unknown   at  this  day  amongst   civilized 
nations:  •  and  Sir  Henry  Clinton,  when  he  heard  of  the  particu- 
lars, also   described   it   as    an    act    of  atrocity   "scarcely  to   be 
paralleled  in  histo  y."     After  the  choice   fell  upon  Asgill  he  was 
removed  to   ihe  camp  of  the   New  Jersey  troops  at  Morristown 
where  Colonel    Dayton   commanded.      It  was  while  the  Captain 
was  awaiting  the   order  of  execution    here   that    Judge   Jones 
charges  he  received  most  outrageous  treatment  at  the"  hands  of 
the  Americans. 

'•  C^aptain  Asgill."  s.us  the  Jud,.-  (Vol.  II.  p.  .3,,  .•,,.«  n..t  permitted  ,0  cme 
into  the   preseme  „f  U  ..shi„,.„„  |  Washington  was  at   a  distance  with  the  main 
camp  near  the     h^hlands,  J.  |,  lu.t  instantly  put  into  a  prison,  deprive,!  the  liu't" 
h Lrbr'e'"!    1   '''"■•  h't'^^--""'-f--'-l'ni'tance  -o  him,  and  the  diet  allowed 
h.m  br  ad  and  water,  w,.h  onee  a  week  a  scanty  allowance  of  animal  food:     This 
b    peak,s  the  hu.nan.ty.  the  politeness,  the  virtue  of  Washington.     Caotain  Asgil 
had  but   one  wmdow  tn  h,s  apartment,  out  of  which  he  could  peep  at  the  sun    or 
<!raw  ,n   fresh  a,r.     To  punish   the  unhappy  vouth  as  much  as  possible,  the  reb 
ch.ef  ordered   a  gallows  erected,  30  feet  high,  directlv  in  front  of,  and  a   a  stmt 
distance   frc>n.  the  window,   with   this    inscription    in   capitals,  •  Erected  foti" 

s'K?;::".h    ?'r-"-''^''"-'   J'^'^^^^"— '-l^^is  mscliption   presentdthem 
sehes  to  the  Captatn  s  eyes  whenever  he  approached  the  window,  which  for  tne 
benefit  of  fresh  a  r  must  have  been  oftPn      -'-k;.  ...  .     •  ""^"   ">r  ine 

It  was    L   oiH, .  ,  f  .      .  u  '  "'  'nurdering  a  man  by  inches. 

Unas  a   p.ece  of  barbanty  that  none  but  a  rebel  could  be  guiltv  of      Instant 
execution  would  soon   have   put  the  youth  out  of  hi.  pain,  it  wou  d   have  been 

on"    d  "TT      "     '■"■  "'-^''  '  "■""'"  '^''^■^' ''""  «-"-''-     J-'-i  "^  suffc'r  ng 
one  death  by  an   .mmediate   e.vecution,    the    unhappy    young   soldier   mus  ,   i,' 


ill 


JUDGK   JONES'    HISTORY. 


79 


..".em,..at,on,  have  expcricna-l  one  every  day.      Kvery  m„rni„K  that  he  arose 
^-   naturally  supposed  was   ,he  last  of  his  existence.     Me  never  l!  ^•ed  ou.  „    ,, 
-""1-v   l.u.   he  saw  the  tr-Mnendous   instrument   of  death,   with   the    more    t re 
nendous  tnsc  ription,  •  For  the  K.xecution  of  Captain  .\sKill  ' 

••  At  .onduct   like  this  all  Christians  must  shudder  and  ex.  .rat.  the  unfeeling 
■..everny  whuh  -ould  l.e  «uil,y  of  so  deliberate  and  wanton  an  act  of  cruelty ' 

'I'lic  rcc-.i-ils  f.iil  t..  bear  cut  this  c.xtraordin.ti-v  .^.<,rv.  Init 
point  dii-cctlyto  tlR-  opposite  conclii.sion,  that  Captain 'As^mH 
received  m>  snch  tnatmnit  as  lure  rctnscntcJ.  It  \Nas  rep-.rted 
for  instance,  after  the  uar,  that  As-ili.  wiio  had  been  released, 
circulated  some  such  story  as  the  above  him.self  in  London,  and 
the  report  was  bn.u-ht  to  Washington's  ears.  In  reply  to  a 
friend  who  sou-lit  for  inC.rniation  in  the  case,  the  Chief  wrote  as 
tollows  troni  .Mount  Vernon  on  June  5th.  17X6; 

"That  a  calumny,.!  this  kind  had  been  icportcl  I  know.  I  had  laid  mv 
account  for  the  calumnies  of  anonymous  scribblers,  but  I  never  had  conceived 
before  that  such  a  one  as  is  related,  could  have  originated  with,  or  met  the 
countenance  of  Captain  AskIII.  whose  situation  often  filled  me  with  the  keenest 
an^msh.  I  lelt  for  him  on  many  accounts,  and  not  the  least,  when  reviewing  him 
as  a  man  of  hon,.r  and  sentiment -My  favourable  opinion  of  him,  how- 
ever, IS  forfeited,  ,f  beint;  acpiainted  with  these  reports,  he  .lid  not  immediatelv 
c.ntrad.ct  them.  That  1  could  not  have  Riven  countenance  to  ,he  insults 
which  he  says  were  offere.l  to  his  person,  especially  the  Krovelin^  one  ,.f  erecting 
a  Kil'bet  before  his  prison  window,  will,  I  expect,  readilv  be  believed,  -.he,  J 
extlmth  ,/,,/,„,.  //,„/  /  „,,.,,.  /„,„      „,  „  ,  .„^,/,.  ,,,,^,^^^^  ^_,  ,^^..^.  ^^^^  .^^^^^^^  ^^^^^^  ^^^^^^  ^ 

^';f;PY ';''''•'"  "'"  '""^■'".v./M,,/ A.   ^.as  „;.U,;n.y  th- ojn.cn  around  him  'u,ith 
<1U  tho  t.-iidiTiioss,  ,!,/,/  o:r>r  oivility  in  th.irfo-oor." 

Colonel  Ilumplire.vs.  formerly  one  of  Washin-ton's  aids,  pub- 
lished all  the  documents  relatin-  to  the  affair,  .so  far  as  they 
could  be  found  in  the  Mead  (Ju.irters  correspoiulence.  ,ind  in  his 
l)ief.ice  has  the  followin^^  para-^raph  :  ' 

"  When  1  was  in  llnnland,  last  winter,  1  heard  sURKestions  that  the  treatment 
Capt.  AsKdl  experienced  duriuK  his  confinement  was  unnecessarilvrig..rous  and 
as  such  rellected  .liscre.lit  on  the  Americans.  Having  mvself  bolonge.l  t,',  the 
fanidyof  the  Commander-in-Chief,  at  that  perio.l.  and  having  been  acquainted 
with  the  minutest  circumstance  relative  to  that  unple.-is.int  affair,  I  had  no  hc^ita. 
hon  ,n  uUerh  donyin,  that  thcro  :oas  .,  particic  of  rcnuity  in  thoso  itlil,o,al  s„,.e,. 
tiom.  '  ■'* 


'  Humphreys  t,.  the  F.litois  .,f  the  AVr,.  Ifarvn  Cazctt,;  Nov.  6th.  17S6.  The 
oorrespon.lence  was  reprinted  in  i>;imphlet  form  for  the  "  H.dland  Club  "  N'ew 
»  ork.  in  t  S?.). 


8o 


OBSERVATIONS   ON 


m 


pi   ' 


Surgeon  Thacher,  w'lo  was  also  with  the  army  at  that  time 
gives  many  particulars  of  the  case,  and  in  a  note  on  page  ^84  of 
his  "Military  Journal,"  after  noticing  exaggerated   French  ac- 
counts, writes : 

fan'.' I  '^VT  ""'  ^""'f  '°"^-'^'''''  ^^'"'-  '''"'  "  i"-^'^"'  >"■-'■'■  ^oas  erected  for  Cap.  ' 

weinf:;! ;;;?•'  "''"       ■'  '"  "'"■""'"■'"""•  ^'-^^   ^^^^  -  preparations  whatever 
were  made  for  h,s  execution,  except  a  secure   confinement   for   a   short    period 

dunng  which  the  utmost  tenderness  and  polite  civilities  were  bestowed  on  him 
and   or  these  he  expressed  his  grateful  acknowledgments  in  his  letter  to  Tenerai 
cou'u  '"  t     f  •  r""">'^  preposterous  to  suppose,  that  the  Commander-in^C    e 

could  act  a  farccal  part  by  exhibiting  the  machines  of  death,  when  it  was  altogethe 
problema  ,cal  ---hether  an  execution  would  be  the  final  result,  and  sureiv  noth^g 
could  be  less  character.s.x  o<  Washington,  than  wantonly  to  torture  the  feeling! 
of  a  pnsf)'ier  with  the  horrors  of  death."  'ccimgs 

Another  important  piece  of  evidence  relating  to  the  affair  is 
hat  furn.sh.d  by  Major  Alexander  Garden,  of  Lee's  Legion  in 
h.s  well  known  -Anecdotes.-  He.  also,  speaks  of  these  later 
reports  and  "abuse"  lavishiy  disseminated  by  "the  British 
Gazettes,"  and  expresses  himself  as  having  been  greatly  surprised 
at  and  loaf.,  to  believe  them. 

"Ihadbeenaschool.fellow,"hestates.  "of  Sir  Charle.  .-Will   an  inmate  of 

hesan,    ,_,i    .h„„3,f,,  ,,,,^..,   ,ears,  and  a  di.oosition  m'or:   n  . Id  g     ,,: 

and  affectionate,  I  never  met  with.      I  ,onsidercd  him  ■.    possessed  of  thaf  h  gh 

ense  of  honor,  which  characteri.es  the  youths  of  V     .minster  in  a  pre  em  in 

degree^    Conversing  sometime  afterwards  with  Mr.  Henry  Middleton'  of  Su  f  ,  - 

Great  Britain,  and  inquiring,  if  it  was  possible  that  Sir  Charles  .Asgill   couUi  so 

abu  e.  M  .  MKldle  on,  who  had  been  our  cotempoiarv  at  school,  and  who  hid 
kept  up  a  degree  of  intimacy  with  Sir  Charles,  denied  the  justice  of  he  accu  tio^ 
and   ueclared    that   the   person  charged  with  an  .ct  so  base,  ',.„/,,  ..i         , 

'f  CoA,»JD,,yt.,,,., ,,,./.. /,,^/t;u-., J^or.  ,/  M.  Gmtu,e>„,/  anny,  n-Aosr  July  ha  i 
occasnmnlly  introd,u,-J  tlu;n  to  his  aaiuaint.uuc. "  " 

Underthis  evidetice  it  is  difficult  to  find  any  conrirmation  of 
t  K  Judge  s  version.  Fie  appears  to  have  taken  the  newspaper 
^torics  of  the  time  and  converted  them  into  historic!  fact 
Captain  Asgill  was  undoubtedly  treated,  as  Washin.^ton  directed 
Colonel  Dayton,  with  the  utmost  indulgence.  It  was  neces.sary 
o  have  him  under  strict  guard  but  at  the  .sane  time,  wrote 
Uas  mgton  to  iMyton,  "  I  n.ust  beg  that  y.m  will  be  pleas^^ 
to  treat  Captain  Asgdl  ^.ntn  c.cry  tcn.i.r  aftentton  ,vui  HUntc. 


.*«rr._ 


JUDGE  JONES'   HISTOKV.  g 

believe  J.K!,,o  J ™  !    ^  '^    !  unfortunate  state,  demands."    To 

offieer  like  Colonel  Da  l.oXit!::';?'  r'^'  "  "°"''  ^^™''-"'>' 
"-t,ec.io„s  a,ul  allowed  ti:„'l'^; "T'""'-'' ^^'-"'■•K'-'^ 
ne-ralleged-an  as,ump,io:wh  d'not^''  T""'"  '"  ""'  "'■^"- 
whole  gibbet  and  erneltv  storv  ™  ,  ,  T  ,  '  '■■"'ertained.  The 
errorsand  libel,  ahead  ,  0.1.7.^  ttT'r''"  '"'  '"= 
"l"el,  the  loyalist  historian  drew 'so  freely    "'  "'  '"^'"'^  '™'" 


i 


X..X.-CONCLfD,NG   RUNTS  ...VD  OB.SERVAT.ON. 

are  :!^n:::f:t,r;;;::;;::;,,:-;f«'  --  been  inwted. 
Jud«e  Jones'  .ork.  and  not  , ,  '  V  f '"'T'  '"  "'  """"'  "' 
the  value  of  the  l,i„„rv  is  t  h,    I  ""•'''  '■■'™'''  '>>'  '""'^ 

examination  of  all  ,h  h  1  I  ''^'"""""l-  -^'^  e..ha„stive 
material  unon  the  s  b  .,  •  '  "■"""^"  ""  "'""'""<■■  "»  "e- 
a  search  a„,„„.  nnt  l^.  ";''";"f '""  ""-I- «ould  require 
Great  Bntain-^ouW  "  ,        *  '"'"'  "'  ""'^  "^""'O'  an.l 

of  a   snnilar  elK,rac,'T|     '"''''"  ""^"^■-- '""''er  blunders 
J.Klae.    indeed,  wind,    ou-h.    to  T   "'''""''""<   '""''e    by  the 

-p^;-:-.ee.edu,„„;h:;;.ri^:snC;:a:;:;r''""- 

"tatters.  i,Kidcnt.l.  to  be  acJc^^edf         'T     f   '"'   ^^^""^'^"•>' 
^vritcr.sarc  liable   to   f.^    \T       V  "' ''^^  ^''''''"'''^ 

t'->  uork   as       .     ,        T'  vv.  hout    i.npainn,   the  value   of 

Pn>pcrly  adnmt  d      Tliev        ""'V"^-''^^-^^  -"iticis.n   can   be 
-•th  uhich  tie       d.e       '    T  T'"""''  ^-r.fi,^  sfatn,.,us 

Elnninate    th^/fl^i-'t^-f  ;;„;;•  ;f-^n  i.p,.es... 

^tron^st  points:  the  indictmen        de;       e     ..fT- ^""  "'   '^ 
"f    >ts    mam   pmns       The  (^.       /';;I''^'^^^    "»  ^  .score  or  more 

»taten,eu,s  that  he  „„ee  broke  L  ^       ,  ,r  ,1       1,  ;;''',,''■■'■''■•'■""•^' 
nanced  (he  violation  of  th,.  h ■  "  "HUlte. 

crnel  ,d,use  of  tones.  .Id  di      ^  :,  'trf  u'.^of '^  I'^'^r"'  '".^ 

treatment   of  C.,,,,,;.,     v .„       '  ^  tiait.s  of  a  brute  in   his 

Ihese  matters  are   dwelt    upon 


treatment   of  Captain   As-i 


82 


onSERVATIOXS   ox 


and  emphasized  b_\-lhc  ludi 


of  the  C 


;e  m  order  to  sti;miatize  the 


th 


ommaiider-iii-Chicf  of  the  A 


ese   charges    have   been    found    to  b 


memory 
But 


particulars.     All   the   other  refi 


mericaii  "  rebellion, 
e  t^ross  anil   untrue  in  all 


levelopments  of  secret  histor\-,  but  they 


eiences  are  equally  surprising  as 


severa 


comparison  with  better  record 


s.     The  reader  of  th 


lly  d 


isappear 


by 


but   be  impressed  with  the  fact  that  the  Judi 


upon  the  statements  noticed  A 


R 


evolution    and    h 


u/dkr  out  hi. 


e  work  cannot 
^e  tlepended  much 
V  case  against  the 


illustration.-^   in   his  1 


IS    enemies    generally.      They   enter    as    test 


ine  of  ar 


weakened  by  their  proxen  falsity  and 


;ument,  which   beco 


mes   seriousl)- 


It 


in   ailditioii,   errors   of   1 


inap])lication. 


affectin"-  th 


e  credibilitx' 


esser  impo-tanee  can   be  cited  as 


ot   a  writer,   the  Judge's   product 


Hi 


open  to  a  more  extended  criticism. 

ous   minor  mis-statements,   showing  either  that  he  wrot 


ion   IS 


IS  work  contains  numer- 


lessly  or.  wh.it   is  much   i 


e  care- 


non 


probable. 


sources  o 


f  inf 


was  without  authentic 


ormation. 


'or  exam 


'U 


Am 


res.   strength  of   forces,  et 


Pl 


e.  Ins  inaccuracies  n 


1   ''Ullli' 


encan    prisoners   in   New  York   at   the  cli 


c.   are   frequent  ;    ^uch   as   lo,000 


)se  of   17/6,  wh 


there  were  not  5000.      He  decries  the  raid  upon  the  Connecticut 


coast    m    i7;o.    bee; 
were    tor\-  towns. 


luse    New    Haven,    ['airfield    and     Xorwalk 


at 


wh 


le.ist    two-th;r 


lis   o 


ich    wen 


I-: 


f  ti 


le 


inhabitants"   of 


piscopalians.    and     the     greater    part     of    wl 


"favored  the  royal  cause  during  the  reb 
Ha\(ii.  it  nia\-  be  said  that  si 


10m 


ellion."      Hut  as  to  Ne\ 


le  was   regarded 


tru 


e  Kevolutionar}-  town,  and  statistics  si 


in  Connecticut  as 


tion   of    E 


It    is    also    stated 


pisco])alians  was   Irss  t 


low  that  the  propor- 
lan   one-twelfth  of  the  whole.' 


that 


(lurnu 


thi,- 


raul 


\'ale    C 


oileii'e 


was 


I  I  is  to 


N'fw    Have 

"/■  lilt' 


11    in     1774    liad    about    (xy^v, 


l:{^isc<>pal    Ck 


inlmbitams 


It  nil 


III    Dr.    Hcanlsic 


clergyman  of  \ew  Haven,  dated  A 


III    I  oii>u;firut,  a    letter    tr( 


bel( 


H 


pnl 
"Kinij   to   the   Church    in    Xew   ]\. 


iven  there  are  220."     I) 


l'^2.  it  stood. 


Lirintj  the  war  th 


in    the    Episcopal 
The  souls,  white  and  black, 
uen    ;ire   503;    and    in   my  church  at   West 


acconlinK  to  I'resident  Stiles'  diarv 


e  popidation  diiiiinislu-d,  and  on   [e 


X,  H 


as  foil 


Rev.  Mr.  WhittI 
Rev.  Mr.  I'den 
Rev.  Mather. . 
/'.7'.   HlihhayJ.  . 
Hesides  Vale  C 


iven  had  3322  inh.diit, 


esev 


mis. 


ollette. 


S(X)  ■  Co''.j.-reKatioiial. 

250      /.//.rr'/,;/. 
22(1 


3121 


il 


JVBV.E   JONES'    HISTORV. 


33 


-Hi  valuable  mant.s  n^  rVrt^r  h^rT"^"'  '--^">— ous 
and  a  te.estrial  „obc.  ^l,:!  n.::;!!^'^;!;;;--'^'  '  ^^'-^'^^ 
besides   a    selection    of   well-chosen    h.   l^  '""'"^"'-'"'^'^ ' 

seminary  from  the  late  Dean  H  1 1  '';  ^  ^''''''"^  ^°  ^hat 
Cloyne  in  Ireland,  anl  kno;"  tf''  ''''''''''^'  ^^^^-P  of 
Library.-  ThisJuMvever  La  a'  T  """''  "'  "  ^^^^'  ^^"'^ 
Vale  College  uas  ulund  r'   ,  f  ^'^^"t-'H..s  bit  of  history,  for 

ti-  or  a.; oth^ t;::^::^  trz'i. t  'r'^^ '''^- - 

orrery  oi- j;lobc-a  fact  c-,sk- <,r';     J       .        *'■   '"■T"'S'-'ri|)t- 

American,,  i„  rJ,  „t,'fu"\  ,"'""'  "'  "''  ""J"''  "<  ti.e 

;.;..Ha,  or  Genera,  .^ri/^ar  l'.^  ,'';;v^^'°'irr'""  '«  ''' 
tins,    lie  says, -been  commit,,  I  i  "'^'        "''J  an  act  like 

•"""Pe-tecl  to  the  w.   Id  a  « If  th  "''  "  "■""'"  "">'^'  >=-" 

-'"..■a.T .0  the  Ia,vs and  c-      I?of      ™ r  '"r^K^'.^"*-'')-. and 
pcrf„r,„ed  by  Americans,  whob     "te'  '  ffi    iT     "T"''  ^"'  '"^'"B 
Lord,  and  contendin.-fothM-,^'''''^''''"''''''*^ 
act.  and  thought  no°.l      '  „f  '>''  ^i:'  T'l'^'  ",  "'  "  "«"'°"' 
""  ""'  quote.,  him  a,  gi  °„!  •„„   ,  !  ^   '""  '>-!  ^^ordo,,  before 

>"^  ha.,  not  the  candor  to  ,  de  '  vl  ,,  r  T"l  "'  ""  """« ^  ''"« 
Anrerican.,  h,„,„  „,,,  „„.;"!';"  .^•^'^''°"  ''o^-  "'at  had  the 

'I'-   cannonade   would      . '     ?.  "' ""'  '  '"•"'■-•'  ^'"'■""'B 

WaJatne  Reidesel,  ,  f .  :  „'  "'  '"'Z'"'-  ^''""'  ""»  <^°"« 
am,)-,  urite.,  in  her  "  .Memoi  v-,';.™:"/^--"'  "'  «-«oy„e-,, 
afterward  said,  that  if  he  hid"  l'-„      '"-.  A"i>^nc.ui  j,.eu,.T.d,  Gates, 

not  have  allowed  an/fi    „    t,  t   't    ,  "  T  -  """"    '"  "»"" 

fl,,.   f:     .        ■  ^     ""&   "'  tnat  dn-ectioii      '     Tli  >    r     i 

tnc   hrst   writer  to   reo«1t•^    n,   ^  ,  ''•  -l"'-   jLidcje   is 

Pn-soners  were  lef  t  b  i  '  ,'v"  ''I"",'""  '""  "">■  '°>-"^' 
cans  at  the  ,in,e  the  liri,t,fT'^-  """'''  "'  '"-■  Ameri. 
O"  the  Hudson  u,  , - '-  'T    ^'""""  ^   '  Montgomery 

..ot  have  failed  .:  l^^ :^:7 ::^Z!:^''^  «;«  .--.  could' 

me„.,on  no  such  distressing  episo  e         .-.r  "."'''  '''-'P"'-'^ 

account  of  the  Ston.-  Fni„r    .        .  <-xr.e,l,i,on.     In  his 

'O.SS  of  that  P0^:°:L.:,",r '■;;;•.,.;:-  J,"^>--  Carges   the 


'  ^'°"'  "^  '''"'«'">•'       ^-'-Z-'^.  A'.„/,.v./,  p.  i2t. 


84 


OBSERVATIONS   ON 


■ 


Johnson  u,o   ,s  stated  to  have  been  caronsinj;  at  the  time  uith 
.  party  of  fnends  fro,,  the  garrison  at  VcrplanWs  Po  T   B 
Johnson  s  o,vn  brief  report,  the  narratue  of  Admiral  Co  L  and 

F  ,    h        "'•"-r""'  '"  '"'  P°''  "'  '-'»'  •"  ">=  critieal  moment 

othe    t'^tho      Tr-  "'   ""'"""^   '"^-   «'-   -  offic- 
otner  than  those  belongmg  to  the  Stony  I'oint  garrison   thns 
exchulmg  the  theory  of  a  party  from  Verplanks.     A  "  i     „tn 
Lord  Ra,vdo„   the  liritish    offieer  who  eommande^"  iSo    h 
Carohna  after  Corn„allis  marched  north,  was  made  pri   ,ner  by 
tl>e  h  rench  fleet  under  de  Grasse,  and  taken  into  the  Che    peake 
Congress,  aeeordin.  to  the  Jndge,  demanded   his  sn  rt  d."  to 
he  Amenean  anthorities.     ■■  Surprisinj;  to  relate,"  he  e  "ela  ms 
ye.  an  absoh.te,  undeniable  faet !     They  had  the  im^de  Ke 
o   assuranee,  or  rather  both,  to  send  a  Committee  on  bxn^      ,e 
fleet,  and  demand  of  the  Compte  the  deliver^  of  l,i=  I      a 
into  their  hands,  that  they  mijitt.  as  the    de  L:.d     .e'nte  hh": 

tonj        D.  Grasse.  however,  wc  are  informed,  spurned  the  oro 
posal,  refused  to  surrender  Rawdon  and  snubbecl  the  Commit' °' 
ma  manner  entirely  gratifying  ,o  the  Judge,     We  are  t™  ccen 

solelj .  for  he  gives  no  .luthorit.      „      e  statement.     The  records 
™.;e;:  ::   :t::;  ■  r^  :ndingt„corr„borat;:r^ 

upon  .t.s    face.     In   the  numerous   document.s    relatin.'  to   the 

imt  of  such  a  Committee.     Neither  Washington,  Rochambe-ui 
La  layette,  Knox,  U'ayne  and  other  off^cersrwho  ^I^^^l 
and  correspondence  ccv.-Wn.r  fU  .    ■  journals 

matter      TN  covennt;  the  sie-e  operations,  refer   to   the 

mat  er.  The  demand  for  Raudon  would  have  been  a  nur  v 
nuhtaryactto  be  h-ft  to  the  Commander-in-Chief  "nd  ^t 
Congress;  and  the  demand,  furthermore,  would  w  thout  doub? 
have  passed  through  Rochambeau  as  the  Con.ma  "  o  tt 
P  rench  forces,  but  Rochambeau  has  not  a  word  in  his  Memoir  •' 
about  Rawdon,  the  demand  or  the  refus-.l  TU  r  ,  r^'"""^\ 
ab.e  truth,  no.  ..surprising  to  'k.:  •■",:, s  e  ,"  t':  Vfl:  i:,'- 
One  moretop,c  in  this  connection,  and   that  concern.:  Imc  ^f 


JUDGE   JONES'   HISTORY. 


vall.s  ,n  North  Carolina  in  ./^r  AV'T  ?^^'^-^"ts  of  Corn- 
the  published  controversy  bi  een  J  '  V" '^T  ^'^'^'''— "th 
Cl.nton  rcspcctin,.  the  former's  c'mo'  T'^  '"^'  ''^'■'"  ^^^^"••y 

final  surrender,  he  fails  to  shou  "7^  '"  ^^'^  ^""^'^  ^nd   his 
claims  thr.t  Cornu-allis.  upon  bono  P'"'""*  '"•^*''^"c-^-     He 

to  hold  his  own  in  No  rSroHr:;f  "t'''^  °^  '^'^  '-^^''it; 

^ourt  House,  should  have  r    ^     t;    "    ?^^^'^"'^^   ^^  Guilford 
P-pared  for  another  campa.V '        '1    H         ^°"''  "^'^^^''"-^  ^'^ 
on    and   afteru-ards   to  Vir.:;   i        ^  ''''''''  *"  ^^'''^>n- 

^'Ordship.no  doubt.  ... /X^^^"^'  ^^  ^^e  Judge.  '' H^ 
;-t/-'/.  from  vvhich  he  had  no  r  htt  ''T'-  ''^ ''' ^''''''^^^-''^-- 
'n.^^cncy  nhatever."  No  h,  f-  ?  ^'^'^''''^^'-^  ^'P^n  anv- con- 
^^■ttcrson  the  subject  ouh r".  .  •  "^^^  ^^'"  -^^"^''^  '^^^^  CUntonl 
-^•i^i  have  ascertJ- ^d^  CH  ,:r":;"^'^  ^^^^  ^'^  -H: 
-'-^fcal  with  his  own,  and  Imt  hTf^'  ''"^'"'  '"  '''"^  --"  "-^ 
--c^.  ..fCornwallis  northw^  ^  ^^"^  ^^'^^  ^PP^-ci   to   the 

.^-"na.     In  his -Observation  "on  St    T   '^'"f""'^   ■'"   ""^^'^^ 

J^-haps  Mr.  Stedman  does  no    1-1^"'?'  '^'^^  General  savs  : 

been   ...,,,,,,  ,„,    ,^,^^,  ,r.,ZnZ  ^°"'  ^'^"''""'''''-^  ^ad 

^-ohna,  to  fall  back  on  So   t     c    V'""  °     '"'^'"^    '"    ^^^rth 

evident  that  Jud^e    Ion.  <^:"^ol'na.  and  secure  it."     It  f, 

P-sonal  hosti^ty?o  CH  ^.^.^l^f  ;r.  ^"^^  ^^^  ^^^^  that'hi: 
or  supposition  that  would  1  X  to"^  h  "  "''"'''  '"^"^^  ^'^"^^^-y 
t'-^t.on.     To  these  minor  mtt  .t  ^"^"  '"'  ^^'^^"^•"•'^'"^  repu- 

orcier)  still  more  might  r  a  lirb^XL?  "  '^7  '^'■^'  °^  '^  -• -r 
necessary.  '>  ^^  '^^'ded.  were  further  illustration 


As  a  natural  conclusion  to  the  fnr  ■ 
servat.ons,  the  question  occurs  wle^hetf'"'^  '"''"''^^'"^  '^"^  °b- 
the  numerous  lesser  blunder  to  be  fo  '';^""P^'-t'"^t  -n-ors  and 
do  not  form  the  basis  of  a,  nf  uorab  "  '"  '''''  •^^^"^'^'  ^^^ 
-  -^^->r.  It  has  been  t;^  "^  ^^^  'rr^  °'  '^  '^^^  ^ 
positive  assertions  which  h.ve  no  f  .  •^'"'^^  '"''^^"^•^  '"ost 
though   beingajud.e   he     i'   .  ^"^'"^ation    in    fact-that 

the  truth  oft hii  ^■c::..^':^^;!:::^;^  --ageous  libels; 
-ngle  reason  that  they  were  false-l  !,  "  '''"'■'''  °^'  ^""^  ^he 
-warrantable   inferences-that   he  ^"^'V:  ^'^  '^  ^'^^^^^ 

'o\\s  tnc    ^iueruess  of  his 


■ 


U:*'^': 


86 


OBSERVATIONS    OX  JVlH^K   JONEs'    ,„sTORV. 


pen   by  tlie  readiness  with  which   he  seems  to   .rr     ,        i 

irresponsible  so:  o,  1  .'^V' iHrf;/"-"  '^"'^y  - 

the  cases  examined      An      f  ,i  '        ,'"'       ""  """^  "P'"')'  '^ 

and  eo.ece  co„c,::io„t^:i;^::xj::^r;^,i-rr 

cases  noticed,  proved   hims.-lf  n   Kl      J  "^  '  '"  ^^^"^ 

ness  and  writ Jr,  .J, ,/    ^1  ,,  t  f:""^/"',  unreliable  wi,. 

buspicion   at   once   -it-t.rl,,.-  f      i-  •  <t("na   to-tUiy  ,■> 

'11.^  upinions    and     impressions  <'■en(■r■lll^'    ^c    .v, 
a..d    events,    „is    exposition    of    n.otives,    am  ll'    '^holj  d" 
de„u„e,atK>„  of  whomsoeverand  u  hatsoevr  affect    I  ,  T    , 

true  loyalist  unfavorably-l,ou  f,r  .''""',"■'•'='"*''""' 
■^  these  and  si„,il,.  effnsi:  tt  .  .it:S.  hi'^'''"""i 
How  mnch  in  it  and  precisely  .hat  is  to  c"      d  TT^\ 

what   upon  evidence,  it  is  certain  cannot  be    ccc-,Cd'^    V 
the  hne  to  be  drawn  h.-H,  -  ,wi      t     ,  'i«-t-Lpi:ccl .    \\  lierc  is 

and  the  Jud.'e  M^^^^^^^^^  -'  — te  historian 

rumor  .^  The  qu  :lf^,  ;;"' ?'''^'"'°"^  ^^^••°"'^'-°f  -Port  and 
work  is  to  b!re  ":,;"' 'f.^'?"''^^^'^^-  ^'^'^-^^  Judge  Jones- 
advanced  in  til  :;^:;:^,:  ^'l^^'  7"-^'''-  -  "ot  a  Cairn 
cal  student   anxious   In  '  '"''"'"  "■''"''^^'''  ^'^^'  '>''^tori- 

ins  eveiyt  ;  ""  ^^  •"  ^:■^^°^^'^  ^^'  ^'^  bottom  and  welcom- 
include  tlie  J^.d- e        ion    ^^  .   7'^^-"P--T"  mark  upon  it.  can 

-^    ^^    ''"^'^"^^  )i'-^  tru.stworthy   inform mt^      'l"! 
must  remain  a  conviction   that  however  tL-     he  I  •       "'" 

ments  may   prove  to    h..  in  ^^^^^rtruc   the  Jud-e  s  .state- 


I 


I 


I 


